If the damage types in a power change, the power both loses the keywords for any damage types that are removed and gains the keywords for any damage types that are added (the poison keyword is removed from a power only if that power neither deals poison damage nor has any nondamaging effects).
The original keywords of the power are only removed if the damage types are removed. That's the important part of that rule "for any damage types that are removed". The magic item/feat/feature has to change/convert all the damage of a power to a different type of damage to lose any keywords.
A Flaming weapon's at-will power changes all damage of a power you use to fire so under the new rules the power will lose all other keyword because it lost the damage type. If you you are using a +1 Flaming Weapon without the at-will switched on and crit you will now do +1d6 fire damage, but the rest of the power will be unaffected because the original damage types were not changed.
Nothing about Flaming Weapon says that all damage is only fire damage or that all damage is changed to fire damage. Fire+cold is still doing fire damage--it still triggers fire vulnerability.
Compare:
Flaming Weapon: All damage dealt by this weapon is fire damage. Elemental Challenge: When you deal damage to a creature by using your divine challenge power, you can change the damage type from radiant to acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder. Power of the Storm: When you use a power associated with this feat, you can choose to change itsdamage type to thunder.
Suoitidure] Nothing about Flaming Weapon says that all damage is only fire wrote:
Nothing about Flaming Weapon says that all damage is only fire damage or that all damage is changed to fire damage. Fire+cold is still doing fire damage--it still triggers fire vulnerability.
Compare:
Flaming Weapon: All damage dealt by this weapon is fire damage.
What makes this slighly problematic is the example given in the Rules Update:
For example, if a wizard casts ray of frost through a flaming staff and uses the staff ’s ability to change the damage to fire, ray of frost gains the fire keyword and loses the cold keyword for that use, since the power is dealing fire damage instead of cold damage.
Do they mean an implement named Flaming Staff? No such named implement exists in CB. Staff of Fiery Might is similar in name, but its power is unrelated to what is being discussed.
Do they mean a Flaming Weapon, that happens to be a staff? Then this behavior doesn't match the description of Flaming Weapon (which Suoitidure referenced above).
My thoughts: I suspect they meant the example to refer to a generic Flaming Weapon. So I read their intent as having the item fully convert the attack to fire, resulting in the loss of the cold damage type AND cold keyword.
Of course, the rewording does add a SIGNIFICANT limitation on the Dice of Auspicious Fortune (DAF): they can not be used to score a critical hit. Here is my rational for this ruling:
1. The rules for scoring a critical, per the compendium this morning, read as follows: "Natural 20: If you roll a 20 on the die when making an attack roll, you score a critical hit if your total attack roll is high enough to hit your target's defense. If your attack roll is too low to score a critical hit, you still hit automatically." To me, this implies that if you did not ROLL your 20, you CANNOT score a critical hit.
2. The rules for the DAF, again per the compendium this morning, read as follows:
Daily Usage - "...Effect: Roll 3 d20s..."
Encounter Usage - "...Effect: When you make an attack, instead of making an attack roll,..."
There is NOTHING in the rules for the DAF that indicate the user is making an attack roll. Therefore, the results from the DAF cannot be used to score a critical hit.
Having said that, the DAF are still valuable items. I have a couple of characters would enjoy a pair.
Nothing about Flaming Weapon says that all damage is only fire damage or that all damage is changed to fire damage. Fire+cold is still doing fire damage--it still triggers fire vulnerability.
Compare:
Flaming Weapon: All damage dealt by this weapon is fire damage. Elemental Challenge: When you deal damage to a creature by using your divine challenge power, you can change the damage type from radiant to acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder. Power of the Storm: When you use a power associated with this feat, you can choose to change itsdamage type to thunder.
Might there now be a contradiction on PHB 226 and PHB 276 with the update?
They simply missed the reference on pg226. It'll probably be in the April update and/or PHB3 will just make PHB1 obsolete on such matters. It's not a contradiction if the staff actually changes the damage type and not adds the damage type.
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way. Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken. Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken. King Fisher Does an excellent job at keeping an enemy disabled in a few ways. Strong. Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading. Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered. Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square. Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong. Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked. Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic. Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation. Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses. Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat. Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent. Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof. Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it. Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways. Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful. The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken. Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken Unnamed Avenger|Runepriest/Hammer of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered. Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5. Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong. Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight, only far more broken. Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken. Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.
Of course, the rewording does add a SIGNIFICANT limitation on the Dice of Auspicious Fortune (DAF): they can not be used to score a critical hit. Here is my rational for this ruling:
1. The rules for scoring a critical, per the compendium this morning, read as follows: "Natural 20: If you roll a 20 on the die when making an attack roll, you score a critical hit if your total attack roll is high enough to hit your target's defense. If your attack roll is too low to score a critical hit, you still hit automatically." To me, this implies that if you did not ROLL your 20, you CANNOT score a critical hit.
2. The rules for the DAF, again per the compendium this morning, read as follows:
Daily Usage - "...Effect: Roll 3 d20s..."
Encounter Usage - "...Effect: When you make an attack, instead of making an attack roll,..."
There is NOTHING in the rules for the DAF that indicate the user is making an attack roll. Therefore, the results from the DAF cannot be used to score a critical hit.
Having said that, the DAF are still valuable items. I have a couple of characters would enjoy a pair.
On the contrary, "...instead of making an attack roll, you can use one of the results stored in the dice..." exactly means you are doing the same thing as if you had rolled an attack roll. So, of course you can score a critical hit with this. If not, well, I suspect you could not hit either.
I think the key element of the question and the attempted answers are breaking out into two separate issues which are generating confusion. I'm going to try to answer them here, but please, if I am mistaken on some of this, I would appreciate it if someone could correct me.
First, let's break this down into the component parts of the questions. I'm going to use a few iconic magic items to try to demonstrate where the problem originates, and will mention some feats that can potentially be impacted. Please assume implement and weapon proficiency for the purposes of this example.
Issue 1: Warlock A possesses a Flaming Dagger, as well as Gloves of Eldritch Admixture.
1. Warlock A triggers Dagger "make me fire" power, changing all damage through it to fire damage. 2. Warlock A curses creature X. 3. Warlock A throws Eldritch Blast at creature X, hits. 4. Warlock A now chooses to inflict curse damage on X. 4a. Warlock A now chooses to apply curse damage through Gloves as Cold damage.
The question at hand is twofold: * Does the use of the flaming weapon change all damage to fire damage? * Does 4a addition of "Cold" thereby override and remove "Fire" keyword applied when it is used per "changing keywords" text quoted several times before?
The answer to the first question, does the use of the flaming weapon change all damage to fire, is yes. Any power using this weapon as a weapon or implement is explicitly inflicting damage with this weapon, ergo it falls under the umbrella of its text: "All damage dealt by this weapon is fire damage." As such, it gains the Fire keyword. Whether that power is a MBA or a fancier power, if it uses the dagger when the dagger is turned on, it's going to become fire, and per PHB3 and the errata, it will lose all other damage types in becoming so. It will have the Fire keyword prior to the to-hit roll and will be subject to bonuses to hit and damage as a Fire power.
The second question is the nebulous one, which leaves a vagueness behind.
I believe the confusion that is arising is that some people are assuming the gloves are imparting cold on the power, and that some are assuming that the gloves are imparting cold on the damage, and hearing the answer to the first question and assuming the Fire is being overridden by the addition of Cold.
I'm going to take the step of pointing out that no, the Cold is not overriding the Fire - quite the contrary. The Cold becomes irrelevant as soon as the damage is delivered by the dagger, which is the case for 'extra damage.' The curse damage becomes part of the Eldritch Blast damage, and was delivered through the implement. It was cold when it was generated, but the dagger delivered it and changed it to fire per its text.
Issue 2: 1. Warlock A throws Eldritch Blast at creature X with his flaming dagger currently turned off. 2. Warlock hits critically with the attack, generating additional Fire damage. 3. Warlock A now chooses to inflict curse damage on X. 3a. Warlock A now chooses to apply curse damage through Gloves as Cold damage.
So attack is now generating untyped, plus fire, plus cold damage.
Which inspires the questions, is this power now considered to have the Fire or Cold keywords? Is it considered to have had them, even prior to the attack? And most importantly - does all the damage dealt by the attack take on the same keyword or keywords?
The answer to these three questions are yes, and no, and yes.
When the attack was made, the dagger was off, and it was a normal Eldritch Blast. No keywords attached. No to-hit bonuses for Fire or Cold would apply.
When he hit critically, it acquired the Fire keyword. As the to-hit roll was already made, no modifiers to-hit would be considered. Fire damage modifiers or vulnerabilities do now come into play. It was still dealing some untyped damage, but it has now acquired the Fire keyword.
After evaluating damage, Warlock applied curse damage as cold. Per the rules quoted previously, the power both loses the keywords for any damage types that are removed, and gains the keywords for any damage types that are added. Since this doesn't remove a damage type, the power doesn't lose anything. So, the power now acquires the Cold keyword. It does not remove the Fire keyword, because unlike the dagger there is no rider on the gloves specifying that all damage is now cold, or that other keywords should be removed, and the dagger's text is turned off, so the cold is not overridden. So now any Cold damage modifiers or vulnerabilities come into play.
After finishing application of damage, the attack has both Fire and Cold keywords. Since it didn't have either one during the to-hit roll, effects like Wintertouched could not enter the equation, because there were no keywords to give them a grip. On the other hand, Lasting Frost could kick in after the hit, because cold damage was dealt.
But what about resistances? If Warlock A did 3 untyped, 3 Fire, and 3 Cold, then what would be the outcome of the hit if Creature X had: Resist 5 Fire? Resist 5 Cold? Resist 2 Fire and Resist 2 Cold? Resist 3 Fire and Resist 1 Cold? etc.
This is where it gets complicated, because I think this is what is not understood clearly. The power has become keyworded as
"Arcane, Implement, Fire, Cold"
...which yields, respectively: 4 Fire and Cold damage 4 Fire and Cold damage 7 Fire and Cold damage 8 Fire and Cold damage
Because only the least resistances would apply (flip a coin where they are even). Vulnerabilities to Fire or Cold would add their values to the total.
However, I think a good argument could be made that the damage, although delivered together, should be considered of separate types. I think that would actually make more logical sense, and were I to run into such a houserule it would not upset me, but it would not be RAW.
Again, correct me if this is mistaken. In any case, I hope it is found helpful.
T
Yeah. I did just kill your BBEG with a vorpal frisbee. Problem?
[snip] Lasting Frost (PHB paragon feat - post update): Benefit: Once per turn, the first target you hit with a power that has the cold keyword gains vulnerable 5 cold after the attack. The vulnerability lasts until the end of your next turn.
Arcane Fire (Arcane Power heroic feat): Prerequisite: Int 13. any arcane class Benefit: When you hit a target with an arcane fire power, that target gains vulnerable 5 cold against the first arcane attack power you use against it before the end of your next turn.
As the player of a Wizard with Lasting Frost, I traded Arcane Fire for Lasting Frost at level 12. My typical opening salvo for an encounter is Frostburn, dealing Fire and Cold damage, with a damage rider in the zone. With the update, the HeroicFeat is actually better than the Paragon Feat! I wonder if the prerequisite of Arcane Fire wouldn't do a lot more to fix Frostcheese than the update we got. As for my Wizard, since it is a home game, we plan on ignoring the change to Lasting Frost, the DM agrees that the 5 extra damage has not been a problem, but in LFR that isn't an option.
How do you figure Arcane Fire is better? It is restricted in its vulnerability to only your next arcane attack power against it before your next turn. Arcane Fire requires the source to be you, and only one single instance of cold will be enhanced, it's gone after your one tap.
Lasting Frost's vulnerability is against any cold damage done to it at all, from any source. So that could mean environmental, your companions, anything that generates a plink of cold is going to add five more.
I'd be really curious to see what's better about AF versus LF, other than maybe you have more fire attacks that can trigger it.
T
Yeah. I did just kill your BBEG with a vorpal frisbee. Problem?
Guest703856308, a charge is a single action. It is movement and an attack rolled up into one. There is no time to do anything else, not even a free action.
Actually, there's a lack of consensus on that. Many people are of the opinion that you can take a free action even in the middle of another action, often pointing to Elven Accuracy as an example.
They, of that opinion, would be wrong.
T
Yeah. I did just kill your BBEG with a vorpal frisbee. Problem?
For me it comes to Frostburn, or Scorching Burst with Arcane Admixture to cold. The updated version of Lasting Frost would hit one target in an area with vulnerability until the end of your next turn. Arcane Fire would let you drop a Scorching Burst on a group and deal extra damage to every repeat customer.
So while it isn't strictly better, it certainly creates a case where a Wizard taking Lasting Frost is better served with Arcane Fire. You are absolutely right about the synchronizing effect Lasting Frost can give the rest of the party, though.
My understanding of why Lasting Frost got changed was that it combined with Frost weapons on multi-weapon attacks. The change that went in affected Wizards, and left the problematic "frost-cheese" alone. I was mostly drawing a comparison between Arcane Fire and Lasting Frost to highlight why the actual update was not a good one.
What makes me sad - no more compiled magazines: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/27580349/Dungeon_and_Dragon_Magazine_PDFs&post_num=24#495423645
