DPR King Candidate

26 posts / 0 new
Last post

Still working on the math, but I think this comes out to about 1113 per round.

Start at 0 hit points or fewer and auto save vs. daze (+10 to that save).

Minor action: miss with earthshock. (+21 vs. fort 95% chance of missing - also see dice and sorc. re-roll)

Remaining 5 actions (six after milestone) become ranged basic attacks (unless you have more than one target in which case your standard becomes a rapid shot and the remaining attacks become basic attacks)

RBA to Hit (with combat advantage)

Waistband: -2
Combat Advantage: +2
Dex: +9
Head: +3
Enhancement: +6
1/2 Level: +15
Expertise: +3
Nimble Blade: +1
Proficiency: +3
=+40 vs reflex

RBA Damage (frost dagger +6)
Waistband: +5
Dex: +9
Gloves: +4
Lasting Frost:+5
Light Blade Focus: +3
Primal Eye: +9
Light Blade Expertise: +3
Bracers: +6
Shard: +5
Enhancement:+6
Harp: +5 (note this character never needs to take a short rest so this is a persistent bonus).
= 2d4+ 60 = 65.  Crit = 89

Lighning Field:
2d6+9+5= 21 per square of slide = 168 damage per hit.

.95*168+.9*65+.05*89 = 222.5 X 5 attacks = 1113 dpr

For every additional target in a rapid shot you would add about 200 to that total (not quite 220 because you need to take a -2 to hit).  If one were concerned about killing oneself in a rapid shot volley, you could forgo the waistband (which sucks to do admittedly) and put on the resist all 30 waist slot item instead. 

====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
Cold shocker, level 30
Revenant, Sorcerer/Ranger, Lightning Fury, Star-Favored Champion
Sorcerous Power Option: Sorcerous Power Dexterity
Hybrid Talent Option: Soul of the Sorcerer
Soul of the Sorcerer Option: Storm Soul
Hybrid Ranger Option: Hybrid Ranger Fortitude
Extra Manifestation Option: Earthsoul
Earthshock Option: Earthshock Strength
Choose your Race in Life: Genasi
Spellscarred
Scorned Noble (Scorned Noble Benefit)
Theme: Chevalier

FINAL ABILITY SCORES
STR 10, CON 24, DEX 28, INT 12, WIS 16, CHA 12

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
STR 8, CON 13, DEX 18, INT 10, WIS 13, CHA 10


AC: 34 Fort: 34 Ref: 34 Will: 33
HP: 181 Surges: 13 Surge Value: 45

TRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics +31, Dungeoneering +23, Nature +23, Stealth +29

UNTRAINED SKILLS
Arcana +16, Athletics +17, Bluff +16, Diplomacy +18, Endurance +24, Heal +18, History +16, Insight +18, Intimidate +20, Perception +18, Religion +16, Streetwise +16, Thievery +24

POWERS
Basic Attack: Melee Basic Attack
Basic Attack: Ranged Basic Attack
Chevalier Attack: Valiant Charge
Revenant Utility: Dark Reaping
Hunter's Quarry Power: Hunter's Quarry
Seeker Feature: Inevitable Shot
Genasi Racial Power: Earthshock
Star-Favored Champion Feature: Sign of Challenge
Ranger Attack: Rapid Shot
Sorcerer Attack 1: Acid Orb
Ranger Attack 1: Fox's Cunning
Seeker Attack 1: Elemental Spirits
Ranger Utility 2: Crucial Advice
Ranger Attack 5: Bloody Throw
Sorcerer Utility 6: Chaos Wager
Sorcerer Utility 10: Narrow Escape
Lightning Fury Attack 11: Furious Bolts
Lightning Fury Utility 12: Lightning in the Blood
Sorcerer Utility 16: Dominant Winds
Lightning Fury Attack 20: Bolt of Power
Sorcerer Utility 22: Fool's Luck
Ranger Attack 23: Avalanche of Fury
Ranger Attack 25: Unstoppable Arrows
Star-Favored Champion Utility 26: Sign of Hope
Ranger Attack 29: Five-Missile Dance

FEATS
Level 1: Light Blade Expertise
Level 2: Hybrid Talent
Level 4: Primal Sharpshooter
Level 6: Mark of Storm
Level 8: Extra Manifestation
Level 10: Nimble Blade
Level 11: Primal Eye
Level 12: Lasting Frost
Level 14: Earthshock Master
Level 16: Death's Quickening
Level 18: Superior Will
Level 20: Deft Blade
Level 21: Ghostly Vitality
Level 22: Focused Mind
Level 24: Deadly Draw
Level 26: Archery Mastery
Level 28: Weapon Focus (Light blade)
Level 30: Distant Shot

ITEMS
Dice of Auspicious Fortune
Stone of Wind
Horreb Ritual Cube
Adventurer's Kit
Bracers of the Perfect Shot (epic tier) x1
Eagle Eye Goggles (epic tier) x1
Rushing Cleats x1
Staggering Mace +6 x1
Ollamh Harp
Frozen Whetstone (heroic tier)
Gloves of Ice (epic tier) x1
Waistband of the Grappler x1
Ring of the Radiant Storm x1
Ring of Free Time x1
Eberron Shard of Lightning (epic tier)
Frost Dagger +6 x1
====== End ======

Frost dagger should be changed to staggering, or whatever else is needed to get the slide up to 8 as quoted.

Unless you have enough to afford 7 of them, please don't use daily powers towards your DPR.  If that is the way you're getting lightning damage please do some juggling for your frost/lightning damage types (whetstones, weapon...)
DPR King Candidates 3.0
How much damage should I shoot for?
You're fired : 1 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .2 KPR Fair Striker : 2 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .4 KPR Highly Optimized : 3 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .6 KPR Nerfbat please : 4 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .8 KPR It's OVER 9000!!!!!: 5 Kills Per 5 Rounds = 1+ KPR
DPR? KPR? KP4R? Bless you
DPR = Damage Per round ~= Chance to hit * damage on a hit KPR = Kills Per Round. 1 Kill = 8*Level+24 damage = DPR/(8*level+24) KPNR = Kills Per N Rounds. How many standards can you kill in N rounds?
The lightning damage comes from the Harp.

RAW you dont need to attack with the staggering weapon to gain its benefit, I just hold the staggering mace in the offhand.  
The property reads:  "When you use a power with the weapon keyword that slides a target, you can add this weapon’s enhancement bonus to the number of squares the target slides."  It's not the same as "when you attack with this weapon".  It's the same as any property that just happens from carrying the weapon.  
Sorry, but the RAW is against you on that one. Weilding in that context means attacking with, not just holding. It has been covered in a couple different erratas/faqs/forum discussions. Its why dagger rogues don't just hold a dagger in their off hand and attack with essentially a +4 / d8 rapier.
I'm actually with Mr. Blaise on this one. It's properties, not daily powers, that only work when the relevant weapon is used to attack. The daily power doesn't list such a qualification (and, since it grants the same bonus to allies, wouldn't work if it did), and, as such, the bonus can be used with attacks from any source.

The borg, however, is not to be argued with.

EDIT: Huh, we're not talking about the harp, are we. Woops.
Sorry, but the RAW is against you on that one. Weilding in that context means attacking with, not just holding. It has been covered in a couple different erratas/faqs/forum discussions. Its why dagger rogues don't just hold a dagger in their off hand and attack with essentially a +4 / d8 rapier.



Can you point me to a specific ruling to that effect?  I can't think of any where this is the case. 

If a power says, "you must be weilding a dagger" then yes it must be used in the attack.  This property doesnt say that.

If a weapon or implement just has a blanket property, you dont need to be using in the attack to benefit from that property.  There are many things for example that give you a static bonus to a skill or a defense.  Those bonuses dont "activate" when you make an attack.  You just need to have that item in one of your available slots.  In this case, you get a static bonus to all of your slide weapon keyword powers. 

Even if this were not the case, you could whetstone to get the cold damage if you so desired, but I dont think it's necessary.
Thread on this topic indicating that constant benefits from a weapon merely require that you have a usable item equipped in the appropriate slot:
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...

The example listed in the AV1 is the cunning weapon which SPECIFIES:  " Against any effect delivered with this weapon".

Personally, I think the AV1 text is really contradictory, and what it meant to say is that properties specify whether the weapon must be used in the attack to benefit from the property. 

Otherwise it is completely at odds with the PHB FAQ for implements.  You might argue that an implement follows different rules than a weapon in this regard (which though silly could be true) but then what about weapliments?  I could easily swap a feat for heavy blade as implement, so that I could benefit from the property of my implement (heavy blade) while attacking with my dagger.

PHB FAQ:  18. Can a Warlock benefit from holding two rods?


Yes, a warlock can gain the properties from two rods but he still can only use one to make an attack.



Weapon Properties
Many weapons have properties that provide a
constant benefit. To gain the benefit of a weapon’s
property, you must be wielding the weapon. Unless
specified otherwise, a property affects only the
weapon to which it’s attached. For example, a +2 cunning
dagger, which bestows a –2 penalty to an enemy’s
saving throws against your weapon powers, affects
only powers that are delivered using that weapon.
You couldn’t hold the weapon in your off-hand and
gain the benefit of the property on powers delivered
using a main weapon.



There is no such limitation on implements.  The problem is that you must be able to weild maces as implents.  It may be an implement for some class, but do you have that proficency?

I agree that it's absurd.  The FAQ is a good resource to convince your DM that double rods is how it was intended.

If you can wield the mace as an implement and you are making an implement attack then this is fine.  If you are making a weapon attack it must be the staggering weapon that delivers the attack. 
DPR King Candidates 3.0
How much damage should I shoot for?
You're fired : 1 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .2 KPR Fair Striker : 2 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .4 KPR Highly Optimized : 3 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .6 KPR Nerfbat please : 4 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .8 KPR It's OVER 9000!!!!!: 5 Kills Per 5 Rounds = 1+ KPR
DPR? KPR? KP4R? Bless you
DPR = Damage Per round ~= Chance to hit * damage on a hit KPR = Kills Per Round. 1 Kill = 8*Level+24 damage = DPR/(8*level+24) KPNR = Kills Per N Rounds. How many standards can you kill in N rounds?
I believe thats its and absurd and debatable rules issue, so to make it less subject to debate I'll update with the whetstone later.

For the record though, I think this character could drop distant shot (dont need that feat at all) and take heavy blade implement proficiency, then use a +6 staggering heavy blade in his offhand, thus landing him squarely in the land of "a warlock can gain the properties from two rods but he still can only use one to make an attack". 

And again, why have properties like cunning which SPECIFICALLY SAY "effect delivered with this weapon," if the general rule is properties only apply to effects delivered with that weapon.  When they dont specify that, its clear they didnt mean it.
Different writers with varying levels of understanding of the rules with poor editorial oversight. There are lots of things that just restate a general rule under their effects, leading to similiar confusion of said general rule. DnD lacking a strong and centralzed editorial staff to ensure a consistent writing style has been one of 4e's biggest failings.
Different writers with varying levels of understanding of the rules with poor editorial oversight. There are lots of things that just restate a general rule under their effects, leading to similiar confusion of said general rule. DnD lacking a strong and centralzed editorial staff to ensure a consistent writing style has been one of 4e's biggest failings.



+1 that.

I think at least once per game over the last 4 years someone has brought up an issue that revolves around the usage of the word "attack" in 4e.  Sometimes it means "attack roll," sometimes it means "attack power", sometimes it means the "attack" entry in a power.  Since the very first release of 4e this problem has been around, an no one has made a concerted effort to clarify it.  And "attack" is one of the most fundamental parts of the game so having confusion on that area, means we shouldnt expect any clarity at all in areas that are more esoteric (weild, attack with, hold and be proficient with, equip etc.)

In my real life, I am a licensed attorney, and we have certain "rules of interpretation" that we apply in areas of ambiguity and seeming contradiction.  Things like: "ordinary meaning of the words," "consistency", "authors intent" etc. There's a good list here under "Canons"  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_interpre...

If the DMG/RC at least had something like that, we would have some guidelines in areas like this.  Instead we get inconsistent sets of rules and contradictory customer service answers.  In a home game, a DM can at least make his list of rulings, but Im an LFR guy, and since LFR has steadfastly refused to dive into rules issues like this we are left with no useful guidance.
As per the RC, you only gain the benefits of Properties when wielding the item (and you do have to be proficient with it to wield it). Wield is poorly defined, there was recently a discussion in this terrible thread discussing warding about what wielding means. Regardless, for things related to attacking, wielding means you are using that item in the attack (as per the PHB FAQ about rogue weapon talent), off-handing Staggering is right out for affecting main hand attacks.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
I think at least once per game over the last 4 years someone has brought up an issue that revolves around the usage of the word "attack" in 4e.  Sometimes it means "attack roll," sometimes it means "attack power", sometimes it means the "attack" entry in a power.  .

It explicitly means one of the first two, in all cases. It never means the attack entry in a power. Attack power or attack roll and effects are the two options.
As per the RC, you only gain the benefits of Properties when wielding the item (and you do have to be proficient with it to wield it). Wield is poorly defined, there was recently a discussion in this terrible thread discussing warding about what wielding means. Regardless, for things related to attacking, wielding means you are using that item in the attack (as per the PHB FAQ about rogue weapon talent), off-handing Staggering is right out for affecting main hand attacks.



Yes, but in the same PHB FAQ it gives the exact opposite answer about Warlocks and gaining offhand benefits from implements.  Clearly, this character is proficient in the item (weapliment) in question. 

And if they use specific language saying you must attack with the weapon in almost every other weapon property (there are perhaps 10 exceptions I can think of) then by most standard rules of interpretation it would mean they intentionally left out those words.  In fact, none of the weapon properties specifically say, " you do not need to attack with this weapon to gain the benefit of the property" even though AV says that what they will say in those situations.  The most logical interpretation is that the AV description is a typo that should have said, "weapon properties will specifically say if you need to attack with the weapon to gain the listed benefit" since that in fact is what they do.
I think at least once per game over the last 4 years someone has brought up an issue that revolves around the usage of the word "attack" in 4e.  Sometimes it means "attack roll," sometimes it means "attack power", sometimes it means the "attack" entry in a power.  .

It explicitly means one of the first two, in all cases. It never means the attack entry in a power. Attack power or attack roll and effects are the two options.



So you are telling me the word attack never refers to the line that uses the word "attack"?  Yeah... that's um...  I don't even think you can say that with a straight face.  Before recent RC entries, our DM's only called something an attack if it had an "attack" entry.  Now (and with awful results) they clarified which powers are considered attacks at least, but that broadened definition has resulted in more whackiness than it solved.  Ugh.

Even look at something as basic as a Coup De Grace.  In an RPG, the idea of cutting someone's throat while they are knocked unconscious and thus killing them instantly should be SUPER EASY (as RPGs are supposed to approximate reality in some ways).  Instead we get a rule that is incredibly clunky and almost useless depending on which character is doing it and what DM he has.  For example, a 30th level wizard with a dagger is literally incapable off cuting the throat of a sleeping 20th level solider.  Even if he has a +6 vicious weapon and war ring, he isn't going to do that creatures bloodied value in damage with a melee basic attack.  Then look at a 16th level battlemind with a +3 vicious weapon and war ring - a brutal barrage coup de grace from that character will kill almost any monster in the MM (if you count all the damage from all 4 attacks cumulatively against the bloodied value).  But a DM could say that each "attack roll" counts seperately in which case  you cant kill anything no matter how many "attacks" you make as part of the coup de grace power.
Or they occasionally insert redundant text into item properties that restate the rule, as has happened in every edition of D&D. People are redundant sometimes.
As per the RC, you only gain the benefits of Properties when wielding the item (and you do have to be proficient with it to wield it). Wield is poorly defined, there was recently a discussion in this terrible thread discussing warding about what wielding means. Regardless, for things related to attacking, wielding means you are using that item in the attack (as per the PHB FAQ about rogue weapon talent), off-handing Staggering is right out for affecting main hand attacks.



Yes, but in the same PHB FAQ it gives the exact opposite answer about Warlocks and gaining offhand benefits from implements.  Clearly, this character is proficient in the item (weapliment) in question. 


They don't contradict, you just want them to.
The most logical interpretation is that the AV description is a typo that should have said, "weapon properties will specifically say if you need to attack with the weapon to gain the listed benefit" since that in fact is what they do.


Yeah, clearly that's the most logical interpretation. /sarcasm.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
In an RPG, the idea of cutting someone's throat while they are knocked unconscious and thus killing them instantly should be SUPER EASY (as RPGs are supposed to approximate reality in some ways).


Umm, no... RPGs are supposed to approximate a fantasy, whether it is an extreme tolkienian fantasy or a futuristic sci-fi fantasy, or even a 'modern day' noir style fantasy... in all cases they are meant to create an unreal environment which allows the players to have their characters perform the impossible on a reliable basis.
"A defensive weapon grants you a +1 bonus to AC while you wield the defensive weapon in one hand and wield another melee weapon in your other hand. Wielding more than one defensive weapon does not increase this bonus. To gain this benefit, you need not attack with the defensive weapon, but you must be proficient with it."

So here is the case of a weapon property "defensive" (albeit not a magical one) and the rules specifically saying you are weilding it, must be proficient in it, but need not attack with it to gain it's benefit.  

Theres a couple different things you can take away from this.  1) Clearly wield is not always synonymous with "attack with".  2)  Clearly, in some cases, you can gain a constant benefit from a weapon property without attacking with that weapon.


That is to my knowledge the only property that specifically says you need not attack with something to get its benefit.  Every other time, they specifically spell out that YOU MUST ATTACK with it or the property says nothing either way.  The AV says they will spell out those times you need not attack, but then in fact NEVER spells that out.  People just assume based on the nature of the property that it works one way or the other in times of silence on the issue.  Is it affecting AC?  Well then you probably dont need to attack with it.  Is it modifying an attack in some way?  Well then you have to attack with it.

Let's break it down sentence by sentence:


Weapon Properties
Many weapons have properties that provide a constant benefit.  - Check: +enhancement bonus to weapon attacks that slide.

To gain the benefit of a weapon’s property, you must be wielding the weapon. - Check - proficiency plus equipped (standard definition of wield)

Unless specified otherwise, a property affects only the weapon to which it’s attached.  - Irrelevant.  This property doesn't affect the weapon to which it is attached, it affects weapon powers you use.  A frost weapon for example specifically affects the weapon itself (all damage dealt by this weapon...) 

For example, a +2 cunning dagger, which bestows a –2 penalty to an enemy’s saving throws against your weapon powers, affects
only powers that are delivered using that weapon. - Agreed, that's what the cunning weapon says.

You couldn’t hold the weapon in your off-hand and gain the benefit of the property on powers delivered using a main weapon.  - In this sentence, "the weapon" refers to "the cunning weapon" in the previous sentence, not to all weapons.  If they meant it to apply to all weapons, they would have said "a weapon" instead of "the weapon", so this sentence doesn't apply to a general discussion just to the specific example they listed.

next:
"Yes, a warlock can gain the properties from two rods but he still can only use one to make an attack."  This cannot be interpreted in any way other than: if you are proficient in an implement, and you are wielding that implement if you off-hand but not attacking with it, you still benefit from its properties.

So, in conclusion, proficient in heavy blade implement, wielding staggering heavy blade implement in off-hand but not attacking with it, still benefit from its properties (+enahncement to slide effects with weapon powers).  

Lastly, if this same property were on a neck slot item or an armor slot item there would be no doubt how it worked (the way I am suggesting).  So I have to wonder why if it works that way for necks, implements and armors, why would it work any differently with a weapon.  That is applying the interpretative technique of consistency. 

In an RPG, the idea of cutting someone's throat while they are knocked unconscious and thus killing them instantly should be SUPER EASY (as RPGs are supposed to approximate reality in some ways).


Umm, no... RPGs are supposed to approximate a fantasy, whether it is an extreme tolkienian fantasy or a futuristic sci-fi fantasy, or even a 'modern day' noir style fantasy... in all cases they are meant to create an unreal environment which allows the players to have their characters perform the impossible on a reliable basis.



Both are true.  Basic rules like gravity, economics, cause and effect, some sort of physics and causality apply in almost all RPGs.  The level of fantasy is directly related to the extent that the characters can break or bend those basic rules. 

So the simple expedient of "now that i have knocked him unconscious, I cut his throat" should theorectically apply in EVERY roleplaying game that follows the basic concepts of people are more less like us having simple cardiovascular systems and relatively unprotected jugular veins.  And in fact, prior to 4e, that was pretty much how it went.  Stupid unecessary rule change that in no way reflected a change in the basic dynamics of the D&D universe.  Purely changed as a matter of what some people call "rules balance", same as the vorpal weapon change.
Some physical rules need to be bent to maintain balance in an RPG.  They wanted to represent unconcious and make that condition givable with powers and usable in combat.  Having a coup-de-grace be insta-kill in battle, appearantly, was too powerful.  In 3.5 a dagger to the throat delivered by a str 8 wizard also wasn't an insta-kill, it was just a tough fort save.  They didn't represent "slit the throat" or "spike through the brain has more impairing effects than a spike through the leg."  They just have dagger applied to foe.  In that sense a bigger weapon would have much more effect than a smaller weapon, a bigger damage roll would have more effect than a smaller damage roll.  They wanted to simplify combat with body part independence, and with that went the mapping of body part to body function.  They approximated it with mapping of "has any HP left" with "can make attacks and move around just like he did yesterday."

As per the Attack thing, I too thing a definite ruling on what is an attack, what carries over from the attack power to the attack roll to the damage roll (damage types in particular).

For the DPR king thread, I think that further discussion on whether you can use both the properties of two weapliments on an implement attack should be had in another thread, so versed people can recognize it as a discussion on that subject and chip in.  The closest thing we have is the PHB FAQ which supports 2 rods hinting at being able to use 2 weapliments.
DPR King Candidates 3.0
How much damage should I shoot for?
You're fired : 1 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .2 KPR Fair Striker : 2 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .4 KPR Highly Optimized : 3 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .6 KPR Nerfbat please : 4 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .8 KPR It's OVER 9000!!!!!: 5 Kills Per 5 Rounds = 1+ KPR
DPR? KPR? KP4R? Bless you
DPR = Damage Per round ~= Chance to hit * damage on a hit KPR = Kills Per Round. 1 Kill = 8*Level+24 damage = DPR/(8*level+24) KPNR = Kills Per N Rounds. How many standards can you kill in N rounds?
Unfortunately, even that isn't of terribly much help sense FAQs do not count as part of the canon of RAW. Its ridiculous that material answering rules questions produced by WoTC doesn't count, but it doesn't.
From what I've seen
DM fiat > Errata > FAQ > Text description in book > Table in book >  Char. Op. > Char. Dev. > C.S.

The FAQ is highly regarded on the boards here. 
DPR King Candidates 3.0
How much damage should I shoot for?
You're fired : 1 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .2 KPR Fair Striker : 2 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .4 KPR Highly Optimized : 3 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .6 KPR Nerfbat please : 4 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .8 KPR It's OVER 9000!!!!!: 5 Kills Per 5 Rounds = 1+ KPR
DPR? KPR? KP4R? Bless you
DPR = Damage Per round ~= Chance to hit * damage on a hit KPR = Kills Per Round. 1 Kill = 8*Level+24 damage = DPR/(8*level+24) KPNR = Kills Per N Rounds. How many standards can you kill in N rounds?
*cough*

Q: If you're an Ardent Champion, and you roll two 2s (that miss), what happens?

 Holy Ardor (11th level): Whenever you make two attack rolls because of your oath of enmity and hit the target of your attack, you score a critical hit if both dice have the same roll, except if both rolls are 1.

FAQ says you crit.

No, I don't regard it highly, at all.

"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima

FAQs don't count as RAW because LFR says they don't. Whether or not they are worth anything beyond that is....debatable (good example kilpatds).
Gauntlet Axe/Wrist Razor FAQ entry is another good example of them having poor reading comprehension. In general though, unless they are blatantly violating what other rules say, it's better to go by the FAQ than not.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.