|
5 years ago ::
Jun 17, 2008 - 10:05PM
#31
|
|
|
Keywords and damage type are not necessarily tied together
Question
if a power deals a certain type of damage does it have that keyword? For instance if a power deals fire damage does it have the fire keyword?
I'm trying to understand how keywords work in relation to damage types.
Answer
Greetings,
Even though powers that deal a particular type of damage will often have the appropriate keyword to that damage, it doesn't necessarily have to have that keyword. Thanks for contacting us.
Tony
Customer Service Representative
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2008 - 4:54PM
#32
|
|
|
This answer is "by the book" and doesn't offer a lot of insight, leaving it up to the DM.
Rangers can use two weapons in combat, and many rogues may also wish to take the Two Weapon Fighting feat for the benefit it offers. Does drawing two weapons, one in each hand, count as one Minor Action, or two? Likewise, does sheathing two weapons take one minor action or two? If two, this would appear to mean that switching from dual-wielding to a bow/crossbow or vice-versa is a full-turn action (3 minor actions), correct?
Finally, the Quick Draw feat would appear to allow pulling two weapons out simultaneously, if they are used for the attack power. Would a rogue with Two Weapon Fighting be able to do the same in order to enjoy the benefit of having a weapon in each hand, even if they are using an attack power that makes use of only one weapon?
From Evan T., Wizard's Customer Service, 06/18/2008
According to the rules, you can draw 'a weapon' as a minor action. There are not specific rules for drawing two weapons, so this would be up to your DM to make the call. Likewise, for quick draw, you can draw both weapons if they are both being used as part of an attack. If you are only using one weapon as part of the attack, it would once again be up to your DM to make a call on this ruling.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2008 - 9:50PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jul 26, 2006
|
I'm currently having an exchange with Paul at customer service about Rain of Blows. He thinks it only grants two attacks. I'm glad to see somebody else at custserv disagreed, because the argument for two attacks makes no rules sense to me.
Of course, I've also seen custserv responses indicating that there's such a thing as +6 non-masterwork armor. So who knows.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2008 - 9:53PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2007
|
You can make unarmed melee basic attacks (ie unarmed opportunity attacks) while holding a ranged weapon or implementSpoiler:
Show
Question:
Can you make an unarmed melee basic attack on an adjacent opponent by kicking or elbowing if you are currently holding a ranged weapon or implement that can't be used as a melee weapon? For example, if you are an archer with a bow or a wizard with a wand standing adjacent to an opponent, and the opponent provokes an opportunity action, can you do an unarmed melee basic attack on the provoking opponent by kicking or elbowing them?
Answer:
Please review the Improvised Weapon section of the equipment list (top of page 219). Since a bows and implements only require one hand to hold, you can make a basic melee attack with your fist (Unarmed) if someone provokes an attack of opportunity from you. Remember that some implements, such as Staffs also count as Quarterstaffs when making melee attacks.
Charles
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2008 - 10:21PM
#35
|
|
|
Dealing damage of type X does give the power Keyword X.Spoiler:
Show
This is a two-part question, with the second question dependent on the answer to the first.
(A) Page 55 of the PHB strongly suggests that a spell which does damage of a given type also gains the keyword of that type. To whit: "For instance, a power that deals acid damage is an acid effect and thus has the acid keyword." Literally, if it deals acid damage then it gains the acid keyword. Is this a correct reading of this passage, and is the implication general (if a power deals x damage type, it gains the x keyword)?
(B) If A is not true, does that mean that a power which doesn't have the x keyword but deals x type damage isn't subject to vulnerability or immunity, as per the next paragraph: "Keywords help to determine how, or if, a power works when the target has resistance, vulnerability, or immunity to a damage type or an effect..."? This line of thought is continued in the subsequent paragraph, and strongly implies that resistance/immunity/et al. only look at the keywords to determine their effectiveness. So, hypothetically, if a power deals acid damage but does not have the Acid keyword, a creature who is immune to Acid still takes full damage from the power?
This contradicts the response stardock received above.
I was also involved in a lengthy discussion with CustServe on the workings of bolstering blood. The ultimate consensus was that it currently works as written (ie, every time a spell deals damage you add the bolstering blood damage), but that was not the intention and there will be errata. See here wrote: Thank you for writing. That is true. If you look at the first level daily power of acid arrow, Acid is a keyword listed in the text.[/quote]
(emphasis added. Do note he's responding to A because B is conditional on A being false)
This contradicts the response stardock received above.
I was also involved in a lengthy discussion with CustServe on the workings of bolstering blood. The ultimate consensus was that it currently works as written (ie, every time a spell deals damage you add the bolstering blood damage), but that was not the intention and there will be errata. [url=http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1048488]See here.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2008 - 10:29PM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Feb 27, 2008
|
What stops people from making this stuff up all by themselves? How do we know these are at all legit?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2008 - 10:48PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Dec 31, 2007
|
What stops people from making this stuff up all by themselves? How do we know these are at all legit?
Just about nothing. But if someone posts something so stupid to be unbelievable, we'll know.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2008 - 1:44AM
#38
|
|
|
Besides, it doesn't matter really if it's legit or not...apparently if you don't like the answer to a question you can just resubmit it and chances are you'll get a completely different answer. :P
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2008 - 1:46AM
#39
|
|
|
Besides, it doesn't matter really if it's legit or not...apparently if you don't like the answer to a question you can just resubmit it and chances are you'll get a completely different answer. :P
I honestly hadn't noticed this thread. I was just getting tired about all the debate about keywords when I thought the PHB was being blatant about how they were supposed to work on page 55. So I asked and they said I was right. Then someone pointed me at this thread...
If it wouldn't be too much trouble, could you ask Tony how page 55 is supposed to be interpreted in the context of his answer to your question? I want to know how he manages to arrive at such a startlingly different conclusion, hopefully with reasoning based somewhere on the rules.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2008 - 1:55AM
#40
|
|
|
I honestly hadn't noticed this thread. I was just getting tired about all the debate about keywords when I thought the PHB was being blatant about how they were supposed to work on page 55. So I asked and they said I was right. Then someone pointed me at this thread...
If it wouldn't be too much trouble, could you ask Tony how page 55 is supposed to be interpreted in the context of his answer to your question?
I wasn't suggesting that you resubmitted it because you didn't like the answer 
I was just noticing that it tends to be happening. See the lasting frost + wintertouched thread in CO for another example. Also, I did include the reference to page 55 in the email to Tony. I really wish they would do a little explaining instead of just a flat "yes that works" or "no that doesn't work."
P.S. I like the answer you got a lot more, it makes more sense.
|
|
|
