|
1 year ago ::
Feb 24, 2012 - 6:51AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Feb 24, 2012
|
The starting feature allows you to roll two dice to attack and specifies what happens if both hit.
What happens if one of the rolls hits and one misses? Most roll twice things specify which to use, this one doesn't.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 24, 2012 - 7:00AM
#2
|
|
|
If only one hits, then you don't deal any extra damage; you still resolve the hit in the standard manner.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 24, 2012 - 6:04PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Feb 23, 2012
|
I think the confusion is which of the two rolls do you use to hit, i.e. you roll two dice, miss with the first, hit with the second, do you use the second to resolve the hit or the first die rolled.
hit + hit = power hits + bonus damage from power
hit + miss = ?
miss + hit = ?
miss + miss = power misses + no bonus damage from power
But what happens with the middle two outcomes is the question. With the avenger and similar effects, it is roll twice use the highest, this just says roll the attack twice but does not specify which to use.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 25, 2012 - 2:18AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jul 31, 2007
|
this just says roll the attack twice but does not specify which to use.
The one that hit.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 25, 2012 - 2:43AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
I think the confusion is which of the two rolls do you use to hit, i.e. you roll two dice, miss with the first, hit with the second, do you use the second to resolve the hit or the first die rolled.
hit + hit = power hits + bonus damage from power
hit + miss = ?
miss + hit = ?
miss + miss = power misses + no bonus damage from power
But what happens with the middle two outcomes is the question. With the avenger and similar effects, it is roll twice use the highest, this just says roll the attack twice but does not specify which to use.
I've suggested errata to the effect of 'use the highest'.
But the implication is certainly that that is what you should do. If one of the rolls hits (whichever it is) then the attack hits. If both hit, the attack does extra damage. If neither hits, the attack misses.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 25, 2012 - 6:11AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
This power doesn't change the attack roll.
Its trigger is "you make an attack roll" and it doesn't say use the highest so you don't use the highest to evaluate the hit. If you miss with the triggering roll, you miss. Flat out.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 25, 2012 - 10:26AM
#7
|
|
|
This power doesn't change the attack roll.
Its trigger is "you make an attack roll" and it doesn't say use the highest so you don't use the highest to evaluate the hit. If you miss with the triggering roll, you miss. Flat out.
This. There's only one real 'attack roll' here. The second roll is just used to determine if you get the bonus damage, using a variable probability rather than just saying, say 'roll a d20, on a 10 or better ...'.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 25, 2012 - 12:06PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Feb 23, 2012
|
The ambiguity is the fact it says roll twice instead of roll again. Roll twice is usually used for roll twice use the highest. Roll again would definitely be clearer about what you need to do. You roll, then roll again and if the second roll hits then x happens. Roll twice does not specify which die is used to to determine the outcome of the attack.
I do understand where you are coming from though. Just the ambiguity makes it difficult to state clearly.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 25, 2012 - 1:41PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
It doesn't say you take the highest, lowest, or your choice. So you don't do any of the above.
It doesn't say to apply the second roll to the attack result, so you don't apply the second roll to the attack result.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 26, 2012 - 2:22AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
Basically: it ought to work like OoE+, and I'm sure it was intended to. As written, it technically doesn't. Like a lot of stuff in this book, it's not quite as shiny as it first appears.
Hence the erratum suggestion.
E: this power is also an object lesson in why the 'no-action-interrupt' needs to exist - because it needs to interrupt, in order for the triggering roll to not already count, and therefore not just be a worse version of Furious Assault. But it can't be an II or an OA, because you're probably going to be using it on your turn, and even if not, wasting your II/OA would not be worth it in most cases.
Sigh. So much about this book is just not quite written correctly. It's so disappointing.
|
|
|
