Hi, So when I cast Elemental Bolt,does Elemental Escalation mean that I hit 2 creatures I deal the second creature Bolt damage plus an additional 1d10 or is it just 1d10 damage?
Also,its an encounter power but also a free action and it states I can only use it once per round-so can I use it once per round even though its an encounter power and not an at will?
thanks in advance
Hi,So when I cast Elemental Bolt,does Elemental Escalation mean that I hit 2 creatures I deal the second creature Bolt damage plus an additional 1d10 or is it just 1d10 damage?Also,its an encounter power but also a free action and it states I can onl
1) Each target hit by the Elemental Bolt will take the attack's damage + 1d10 extra damage of the type dealt by the Elemental Bolt.
2) At 3rd, 7th, and 13th level, you gain an additional use of the Elemental Escalation's power each encounter, but you can still use the power only once per round.
1) Each target hit by the Elemental Bolt will take the attack's damage + 1d10 extra damage of the type dealt by the Elemental Bolt. 2) At 3rd, 7th, and 13th level, you gain an additional use of the Elemental Escalation's power each encounter, but you
1) Each target hit by the Elemental Bolt will take the attack's damage + 1d10 extra damage of the type dealt by the Elemental Bolt.
2) At 3rd, 7th, and 13th level, you gain an additional use of the Elemental Escalation's power each encounter, but you can still use the power only once per round.
Thank you for the quick reply,on point 1) the Effect line of EE(fire) reads:you can make one additional creature a target of the triggering attack.
Bolt reads Target:One creature hence my confusion.
Point 2) is now clear,thanks.
Thank you for the quick reply,on point 1) the Effect line of EE(fire) reads:you can make one additional creature a target of the triggering attack.Bolt reads Target:One creature hence my confusion. Point 2) is now clear,thanks.
Elemental Bolt says one creature. Elemental Escalation says to add an additional target, so you do that, and now there are two creatures targeted. Note the distance restriction on Elemental Escalation, it's much smaller than Elemental Bolt's range.
All targets of the power that you Escalated take the full damage, the normal plus 1d10. Can get to be pretty high damage if you use it on some of the burst powers.
Elemental Bolt says one creature. Elemental Escalation says to add an additional target, so you do that, and now there are two creatures targeted. Note the distance restriction on Elemental Escalation, it's much smaller than Elemental Bolt's range.
And because elemental escalation is an arcane power, you can admixture another damage type to it. For example, you add cold to your elemental admixture and you take lasting frost and the whole frostcheese kit. You get the benefit of cold everytime you use elemental escalation even if your normal attacks do not do cold.
And because elemental escalation is an arcane power, you can admixture another damage type to it. For example, you add cold to your elemental admixture and you take lasting frost and the whole frostcheese kit. You get the benefit of cold everytime
--Each target hit by the attack takes 1d10 extra damage of the type dealt by the triggering attack. In addition, you shift up to half your speed as a free action. --Level 17: 2d10 extra damage, and ongoing 10 fire damage (save ends). --Level 27: 3d10 extra damage, and the attack also deals half damage on a miss.
So extra damage is not considered damage? --Each target hit by the attack takes 1d10 extra damage of the type dealt by the triggering attack. In addition, you shift up to half your speed as a free action.--Level 17: 2d10 extra damage, and ongoing 10
It can be admixtured regardless of it being able to deal damage. You can admix thunder onto Swordmage Aegis.
Regardless of EE dealing damage, because you added the keyword, the extra damage will be of that type as per the rules for extra damage; the same reason PoS is both Thunder and Lightning (though it's a rather hazy rule)
It can be admixtured regardless of it being able to deal damage. You can admix thunder onto Swordmage Aegis.Regardless of EE dealing damage, because you added the keyword, the extra damage will be of that type as per the rules for extra damage; the s
Benefit: Choose one arcane power that you know, and choose acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder. The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type and gains that keyword.
This benefit does not function for powers that don't deal damage. No, extra damage is not the power Elemental Escalation dealing the damage, it's an increase to whatever at-will you were using. That at-will is what is dealing the damage. Same with Power Strike, it doesn't deal any damage either.
And no, you can't admixture Aegis, because it doesn't do damage either. Not even Assault.
Powers that don't deal damage don't have damage type keywords.
Benefit: Choose one arcane power that you know, and choose acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder. The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type and gains that keyword.This benefit does not function for powers that don't
Benefit: Choose one arcane power that you know, and choose acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder. The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type and gains that keyword.
This benefit does not function for powers that don't deal damage. No, extra damage is not the power Elemental Escalation dealing the damage, it's an increase to whatever at-will you were using. That at-will is what is dealing the damage. Same with Power Strike, it doesn't deal any damage either.
And no, you can't admixture Aegis, because it doesn't do damage either. Not even Assault.
Powers that don't deal damage don't have damage type keywords.
Except that elemental escalation has the "varies" keyword. And the fire version actually does have a damage type of fire in addition to any other once you hit L17 otherwise it would be ongoing 10 of the same type as the initial damage instead of ongoing 10 fire.
I think that the fact that it has varies indicates that it does have damage type keywords, just that they are the same as the spell you are using it with. There are other powers that say damage type varies as well that are arcane.
Except that elemental escalation has the "varies" keyword. And the fire version actually does have a damage type of fire in addition to any other once you hit L17 otherwise it would be ongoing 10 of the same type as the initial damage instead of ong
It shouldn't have "Varies" though, not by the existing keyword rules. It should be errata'd out, but its presence does not change the fact that it does not do damage. Even for the fire one, that's still the at-will power dealing the ongoing damage, not EE.
It shouldn't have "Varies" though, not by the existing keyword rules. It should be errata'd out, but its presence does not change the fact that it does not do damage. Even for the fire one, that's still the at-will power dealing the ongoing damage,
This benefit does not function for powers that don't deal damage. No, extra damage is not the power Elemental Escalation dealing the damage, it's an increase to whatever at-will you were using.Powers that don't deal damage don't have damage type keywords.
Hellfire Touch, Skulker's Venom and a multitude of other extra elemental damage inflicting powers disagree with you.
Hellfire Touch, Skulker's Venom and a multitude of other extra elemental damage inflicting powers disagree with you.
Bless Weapon does not add radiant because extra damage cannont have a damage keyword.
It is an attack power. It does have a damage type which is "varies", which is a keyword which is defined in the RC. Reading the keyword rules, there is nothing that states that it cannot have a damage type. As a matter of fact, by the keyword rules, EE(fire) should actually have the keywords of "varies" and fire because it adds fire damage to the spell you are casting starting at L17.
Lets see.Bless Weapon does not add radiant because extra damage cannont have a damage keyword.It is an attack power. It does have a damage type which is "varies", which is a keyword which is defined in the RC. Reading the keyword rules, there is no
But there is nothing in the rules that states that an arcane attack power cannot have a damage type and cannot have arcane admixture added to it.
Please list the rule that states it cannot have a keyword or where in arcane admixture it states it cannot be applied.
But there is nothing in the rules that states that an arcane attack power cannot have a damage type and cannot have arcane admixture added to it. Please list the rule that states it cannot have a keyword or where in arcane admixture it states it ca
That people write powers incorrectly does not mean the rules aren't what the rules say they are.
What rule are you referring to and what this rule say exactly ?
The rules on adding and removing keywords. Which is explicitly what Arcane Admixture falls under.
I repeat: a power or effect adding extra damage does not mean that the power adding that damage is dealing the damage. Extra damage is always dealt by the base attack, always. "Always in addition to other damage" if you need a direct quote.
What rule are you referring to and what this rule say exactly ?[/quote]The rules on adding and removing keywords. Which is explicitly what Arcane Admixture falls under.I repeat: a power or effect adding extra damage does not mean that the power add
Mand12, I don't think you understand keywords and how they work. Even utility powers like Onatar's Gift or Blade of Holy Fire that empowers a creature to deal extra fire damage has the fire keyword because they have effect that relate to fire.
Arcane Admixture add the keyword because it says it does. Keywords are not strickly for when a power deals damage. They are generally present in a power because it deals elemental damage. If a power has a keyword because it has an effect associated to the element, its not necessarly wrong. There's hundreads of powers showing this.
RC 110 Keywords: Keywords help in describing a power's effect.
Mand12, I don't think you understand keywords and how they work. Even utility powers like Onatar's Gift or Blade of Holy Fire that empowers a creature to deal extra fire damage has the fire keyword because they have effect that relate to fire.Arcane
And they all use it imprecisely. But that's not even relevant to the question at hand, the presence or absence of damage type keywords in powers that add extra damage means absolutely nothing to the question of what keywords the power they're modifying gain.
Elemental Escalation does not deal damage. Please explain how you think otherwise.
And they all use it imprecisely. But that's not even relevant to the question at hand, the presence or absence of damage type keywords in powers that add extra damage means absolutely nothing to the question of what keywords the power they're modify
Nothing "deals" extra damage. Extra damage is always in addition to other damage. Yes, Elemental Escalation is the reason, but it's not "dealing" damage.
Nothing "deals" extra damage. Extra damage is always in addition to other damage. Yes, Elemental Escalation is the reason, but it's not "dealing" damage.
Of course. YOU always deal damage. But through powers. Powers do grant the ability to deal damage or extra damage, so is their nature. Elemental Escalation does.
And Arcane Admixture let Elemental Escalation now deals a damage type in addition to its normal damage type and gains that keyword.
RC 223 Extra Damage: Many powers and other effects grant the ability to deal extra damage. Extra damage is always in addition to other damage and is of the same type or types as that damage, unless otherwise noted. Because of this rule, an effect that deals no damage cannot deal extra damage. However, a power doesn’t necessarily have to hit a target to deal extra damage—it needs only to deal damage to the target.
Of course. YOU always deal damage. But through powers. Powers do grant the ability to deal damage or extra damage, so is their nature. Elemental Escalation does.And Arcane Admixture let Elemental Escalation now deals a damage type in addition to its
No, the power that the extra is being added to is dealing the damage.
Elemental Bolt, or whatever other sorc at-will you're using, that is what is dealing the damage. Both its normal damage and the extra damage.
Extra damage is by definition a modification of existing damage, dealt by an existing power or effect, and not damage on its own. It is always part of the existing damage roll, and all of it is dealt by the existing power.
No, the power that the extra is being added to is dealing the damage.Elemental Bolt, or whatever other sorc at-will you're using, that is what is dealing the damage. Both its normal damage and the extra damage.Extra damage is by definition a modific
RC pg 223: Extra damage is always in addition to other damage and is of the same type or types as that damage, unless otherwise noted.
That last little bit states that extra damage can be a different type. Where does it say in that sentence that you cannot add a damage type to extra damage?
Paragon TierPrerequisite: 11th level, any arcane class Benefit: Choose one arcane power that you know, and choose acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder. The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type and gains that keyword. Each time you gain a level, you can choose to reassign either the power to which this feat’s effect applies or the additional damage type applied (or both). Special: You can take this feat more than once. Each time you select this feat, choose a different power. You can’t apply this feat to the same power more than once.
Elemental Escalation -Is it an arcane power? Yes -Is it a power that you know? Yes -Does it have a damage type? Yes, the damage type is the same type as the spell you trigger it on
The power states that the extra damage has a damage type and where it gets it. I would say that is a specific, explicit statement that it has a damage type. Arcane admixture allows you to add a damage type to the normal damage type it deals. There is nothing in arcane admixture that states that the power must do damage. Only that the power is an arcane power that you know.
For example: -Elemental Bolt(lightning) -Arcane admixture:Cold(Elemental Escalation) --You cast elemental bolt(lightning) and trigger elemental escalation. Elemental escalation has a damage type, lightning, which, due to arcane admixture, you add cold to it. Your elemental bolt now does lightning and cold and targets a second target within 5 squares of you.
RC pg 223: Extra damage is always in addition to other damage and is of the same type or types as that damage, unless otherwise noted.That last little bit states that extra damage can be a different type. Where does it say in that sentence that you
How is this unclear? Elemental Escalation cannot do damage. It doesn't matter whether you want to change the damage type of the extra damage, the point is you can't do it by admixturing EE because EE doesn't do damage, and admixture only works on things that do damage. The presence of the damage type keyword in a power that doesn't do damage does not mean that the power does damage.
"unless otherwise noted" means things like "an extra 2 fire damage" on a power that doesn't deal fire damage. But it's in reference to the actual attack power being used, not the source of the extra damage.
The third question in your list is wrong. It's not "does it have a damage type" it's "does it deal damage." Admixture doesn't require the power to have a damage type at all. What it requires is that the power deal damage, which EE doesn't do.
always in addition to other damageHow is this unclear? Elemental Escalation cannot do damage. It doesn't matter whether you want to change the damage type of the extra damage, the point is you can't do it by admixturing EE because EE doesn't do dam
The only prerequisites for Arcane Admixture are "11th level" and "any arcane class". For the benefit of the feat, you can choose a power that doesn't deal any damage -- the feat just won't have any effect in that case.
Powers that don't deal damage don't have damage type keywords.
As Plaguescarred noted, there are plenty of counterexamples to this.
However, even if a nondamaging power has a damage type keyword, or if a power has an extra keyword as written, it has no impact on the power's damage. (Ex. Blazing starfall always has the "fire" keyword, even if it's used without the rider.)
Elemental escalation modifies the triggering at-will power by giving it an extra target and making it do extra damage. The elemental escalation power itself does not deal any damage, and is not affected by Arcane Admixture.
(For comparison, another power that works similarly is promise of storm.)
Technically, that is incorrect.The only prerequisites for Arcane Admixture are "11th level" and "any arcane class". For the benefit of the feat, you can choose a power that doesn't deal any damage -- the feat just won't have any effect in that case.A
The only prerequisites for Arcane Admixture are "11th level" and "any arcane class". For the benefit of the feat, you can choose a power that doesn't deal any damage -- the feat just won't have any effect in that case.
Didn't say anythign about prerequisites, I said it can't be admixtured.
Technically, that is incorrect.The only prerequisites for Arcane Admixture are "11th level" and "any arcane class". For the benefit of the feat, you can choose a power that doesn't deal any damage -- the feat just won't have any effect in that case.[
Even if Elemental Escalation would deal no damage, i'd say it still can be admixtured and gain the associated keyword, say thunder for exemple, simply because Arcane Admixture says the power gain the keyword without necessarly needing to deal damage.
And there could still be benefits for using an elemental power for exemple how thunder power benefit from Solid Sound.
Even if Elemental Escalation would deal no damage, i'd say it still can be admixtured and gain the associated keyword, say thunder for exemple, simply because Arcane Admixture says the power gain the keyword without necessarly needing to deal damage.
Even if Elemental Escalation would deal no damage, i'd say it still can be admixtured and gain the associated keyword, say thunder for exemple, simply because Arcane Admixture says the power gain the keyword without necessarly needing to deal damage.
Yes, I agree. If you take Arcane Admixture and select a power that doesn't deal damage, the power will still gain the keyword (as noted in the feat), even though there will be no functional change in the power.
Yes, I agree. If you take Arcane Admixture and select a power that doesn't deal damage, the power will still gain the keyword (as noted in the feat), even though there will be no functional change in the power.
Even if Elemental Escalation would deal no damage, i'd say it still can be admixtured and gain the associated keyword, say thunder for exemple, simply because Arcane Admixture says the power gain the keyword without necessarly needing to deal damage.
And there could still be benefits for using an elemental power for exemple how thunder power benefit from Solid Sound.
Yes, damage type keywords on powers that don't deal damage can and do interact with effects like Solid Sound, that's not what I'm saying.
What I'm saying is that attempting to admix Thunder into Elemental Escalation wouldn't allow the attack to gain the Thunder keyword, even if you assume that you can admix EE in the first place.
The Thunder keyword on EE would gain you the benefit of Solid Sound, but it wouldn't gain you the benefit of Mark of Storm.
Yes, damage type keywords on powers that don't deal damage can and do interact with effects like Solid Sound, that's not what I'm saying.What I'm saying is that attempting to admix Thunder into Elemental Escalation wouldn't allow the attack to gain t
Even if Elemental Escalation would deal no damage, i'd say it still can be admixtured and gain the associated keyword, say thunder for exemple, simply because Arcane Admixture says the power gain the keyword without necessarly needing to deal damage.
And there could still be benefits for using an elemental power for exemple how thunder power benefit from Solid Sound.
Yes, damage type keywords on powers that don't deal damage can and do interact with effects like Solid Sound, that's not what I'm saying.
What I'm saying is that attempting to admix Thunder into Elemental Escalation wouldn't allow the attack to gain the Thunder keyword, even if you assume that you can admix EE in the first place.
The Thunder keyword on EE would gain you the benefit of Solid Sound, but it wouldn't gain you the benefit of Mark of Storm.
So the extra damage, which now has thunder added as a damage type, would not qualify for mark of storm even though you "hit with a power that deals thunder/lightning?"
You stated that the original power does the damage. I completely agree. However, the extra damage from elemental escalation does have a damage type, and specfically has a damage keyword which is "varies", which is explicitly stated as being the same as the original power. Arcane admixture would add another type to that because it says it does. So the extra damage now has the original type in additon too the type from arcane admixture.
There is another arcane encounter attack power that deals extra damage and has a damage keyword. Echoing weapon. Would you say that cannot be affected by arcane admixture as well?
Yes, damage type keywords on powers that don't deal damage can and do interact with effects like Solid Sound, that's not what I'm saying.What I'm saying is that attempting to admix Thunder into Elemental Escalation wouldn't allow the attack to gain t
No, because adding the Thunder keyword to Elemental Escalation doesn't change the damage, because EE doesn't deal damage.
Yes, echoing weapon cannot be admixed either. Because admixture doesn't actually do anything if the power doesn't deal damage.
You can't admix Hypnotism, for the same reason. Same situation. That the effect that the power is doing ends up in another power dealing damage is irrelevant - the power that you are attempting to admix doesn't do any damage.
No, because adding the Thunder keyword to Elemental Escalation doesn't change the damage, because EE doesn't deal damage.Yes, echoing weapon cannot be admixed either. Because admixture doesn't actually do anything if the power doesn't deal damage.Yo
Yes, echoing weapon cannot be admixed either. Because admixture doesn't actually do anything if the power doesn't deal damage.
No you can Arcane Admixture ANY arcane powers attack or utility and doing so always do something.
It doesn't matter if the power doesn't do damage. It will gain the keyword regardless. You can even admixture Majestic Word if you want.
No you can Arcane Admixture ANY arcane powers attack or utility and doing so always do something.It doesn't matter if the power doesn't do damage. It will gain the keyword regardless. You can even admixture Majestic Word if you want.
Yes, echoing weapon cannot be admixed either. Because admixture doesn't actually do anything if the power doesn't deal damage.
No you can Arcane Admixture ANY arcane powers attack or utility and doing so always do something.
It doesn't matter if the power doesn't do damage. It will gain the keyword regardless.
But gaining that keyword doesn't mean that the power that is gaining extra damage from the admixed power also gains that keyword, or that the damage type of that extra damage changes.
Example:
I'm a level 1 fire elementalist. RETH! RETH! RETH!
I take Admixture, and apply it to EE as you suggest, adding Thunder.
When I use Elemental Bolt, and also use EE on that, my damage on a hit is 1d12+1d10+1d6 fire damage. There is no thunder damage.
No you can Arcane Admixture ANY arcane powers attack or utility and doing so always do something.It doesn't matter if the power doesn't do damage. It will gain the keyword regardless.[/quote]But gaining that keyword doesn't mean that the power that i
That is another question, we must first settle that any arcane power can be admixtured and gain the associated keyword.
The rest will depend if you think extra damage powers are powers that have a damage type or not. I say its irrevelant if this extra damage is dealt by the extra damage power or the damaging attack power. Its about dealing a damage type, not dealing damage. So the real question is:
Is an extra damage power deals a damage type ? If yes, it can now deal an additional damage type in addition to its normal damage type. I'd say a power that deal extra fire damage is a power that deals a damage type. And so Arcane Admixture can have it deal an additional damage type in addition to its fire damage type
Arcane Admixture:Choose one arcane power that you know, and choose acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder. The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type and gains that keyword.
That is another question, we must first settle that any arcane power can be admixtured and gain the associated keyword.The rest will depend if you think extra damage powers are powers that have a damage type or not. I say its irrevelant if this extra
But gaining that keyword doesn't mean that the power that is gaining extra damage from the admixed power also gains that keyword, or that the damage type of that extra damage changes.
Example:
I'm a level 1 fire elementalist. RETH! RETH! RETH!
I take Admixture, and apply it to EE as you suggest, adding Thunder.
When I use Elemental Bolt, and also use EE on that, my damage on a hit is 1d12+1d10+1d6 fire damage. There is no thunder damage.
Ok. First sentence is wrong or gloves of eldritch admixture and mindbite scorn would not had acid/cold/fire and psychic damage respectively to the powers you add warlock's curse to. Warlock's curse is extra damage that is untyped. You are using a power to add a damage keyword to extra damage. According to your ruling, you cannot add damage keywords to extra damage because they do no damage. So you just broke gloves of eldritch admixture.
Your example doesn't work because you cannot take arcane admixture at L1. EE deals fire damage because that is what the power says it does. Arcane admixture adds a damage type to a type the power already does. That is all the feat does. So in the example you gave, assuming you could take it at L1, you would be doing 1d12(fire)+1d6(fire)+1d10(fire/thunder, from EE which also has the thunder keyword).
Arcane admixture adds a damage type to an arcane power that has a damage type because that is what the feat says it does. It says nothing about the power needing to deal damage. Because it does not say it needs to deal damage then it does not. The feat does what it says.
Ok. First sentence is wrong or gloves of eldritch admixture and mindbite scorn would not had acid/cold/fire and psychic damage respectively to the powers you add warlock's curse to. Warlock's curse is extra damage that is untyped. You are using a
When you deal extra damage as a result of your Warlock’s Curse, you can choose that damage to be acid, cold, or fire (or leave it untyped).
This works just fine. You're not changing what your Warlock's Curse does ahead of time, as Arcane Admixture would, but rather when you deal it, which is when you hit with another power, and that power is dealing the damage, which you're now changing. And since you're changing the damage type that the base power is dealing, you change that power's keywords as per the "Adding and removing keywords" rules.
Perfectly fine, and not at all the same situation.
"EE deals fire damage because that is what the power says it does." NO. NO NO NO. That is NOT what the power says it does. Extra damage is not the same thing as damage. A power that causes extra damage does not deal damage. I cannot emphasize more strongly how wrong your initial premise is, and that faulty premise is the entire foundation for your argument. To make it absolutely, crystal clear:
Each target hit by the attack takes 1d10 extra damage of the type dealt by the triggering attack. Each target hit by the attack takes 1d10 damage of the type dealt by the triggering attack.
These are not the same thing. In the first case, it is the base power that is dealing the damage. In the second case, it would be EE dealing the damage.
"Extra damage" is a rules construct, not just English wording. "Extra damage" is not the same thing as "damage" in the same way that "feat bonus" is not the same thing as "bonus that comes from a feat"
And really? You're nitpicking the Paragon requirement? Are you kidding?
When you deal extra damage as a result of your Warlock’s Curse, you can choose that damage to be acid, cold, or fire (or leave it untyped).This works just fine. You're not changing what your Warlock's Curse does ahead of time, as Arcane Admixt
The power says that the extra damage from EE is the same type as the power used to trigger EE. That wording states that EE has a damage type. Whether you agree with that statement or not, it is an explicit statement that EE has a damage type.
ALL arcane admixture does is ADD a damage type. It does not look to see if the power deals damage. It does not look to see if it is an at will, encounter, or daily power. It looks for is it an arcane power and is it one you know how to do. That is all. It then adds a damage type to what is already there. In the case of EE, it has a damage type of "varies." Regardless of how badly written it is, that is the way it is written. Because it has a damage type, it even fits the part where arcane admixture looks for a damage type to add another damage type to.
I will nitpick over the paragon requirement if you ignore where I stated in a previous post that EE damage is done by the power used to trigger EE.
And to clarify, which it seems it needs, the damage from EE is fire, in the instance you brought up, BECAUSE THE POWER STATES THAT EE has the fire keyword due to being triggered by a power with the fire keyword, and after L17, would add fire to any power you use it on because it adds fire damage to what the power does regardless of what damage type the power has. If you use EE(fire) on ice prison at L17, it would have both cold and fire, the fire from EE. Extra damage adds damage types. It is why weapon of summer adds fire. It is why warlock's curse+gloves of eldritch admixture add acid/cold/fire. Heck, it is why whetstones add damage types as well.
I have established instances of where extra damage has a damage type and adds a damage type keyword to a power.
What I cannot find anywhere is the rule that states that arcane admixture cannot be applied to an arcane attack power that has a damage type.
The power says that the extra damage from EE is the same type as the power used to trigger EE. That wording states that EE has a damage type. Whether you agree with that statement or not, it is an explicit statement that EE has a damage type.ALL ar
There's no rule against it. The feat text just doesn't do what you think it does. You're reading text that isn't there, and there's not much I can do about that.
There's no rule against it. The feat text just doesn't do what you think it does. You're reading text that isn't there, and there's not much I can do about that.
I am reading the text of the feat. There is nothing anywhere in that feat that states the power must deal damage.
You are the one making the claim that the power must deal damage to be able to be affected by arcane admixture. But that claim is no where in the feat. The feat looks for an arcane power that you know. It does not even ask for an attack power. The feat states that it adds a damage type to the power. It does not even say that the power has to deal damage. You are the only one saying that. The only evidence supporting your position that you have given is the rule about adding and subtracting damage types to powers. Which still says nothing about adding, or not being able to add, a damage type to extra damage.
Arcane Admixture Benefit: Choose one arcane power that you know(elemental escalation(fire)), and choose acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder(cold). The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type("varies") and gains that keyword(cold).
This is my claim. If you add arcane admixture to elemental escalation(fire), then elemental escalation will now do "varies" damage type, with "varies" being a damage type defined in the RC, in addition to what you choose for the arcane admixture. That is what the feat says explicitly.
Please point out where in the feat it states that the power must deal damage to be affected by arcane admixture. Or point out where extra damage cannot and never can gain a damage type keyword.
I am reading the text of the feat. There is nothing anywhere in that feat that states the power must deal damage. You are the one making the claim that the power must deal damage to be able to be affected by arcane admixture. But that claim is no
EE absolutely CAN be Admixtured, and it absolutely will add the chosen keyword to EE.
Admixture says, "The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type," however, and EE doesn't deal damage, so has no damage type, and doesn't gain another damage type.
Just admixture elemental bolt and/or ignition.
This is also something that most DMs would be willing to allow, even though by strict reading of the rules, it doesn't work the way you want it to.
I'm with Mand on this.EE absolutely CAN be Admixtured, and it absolutely will add the chosen keyword to EE.Admixture says, "The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type," however, and EE doesn't deal damage, so has no da
Admixture says, "The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type," however, and EE doesn't deal damage
And it doesnt have to. It has to deal a damage type, which Elemental Escalation does. Its the reason why Elemental Escalation has the varies keyword and Hellfire Touch has the fire keyword for exemple, its because they deal a damage type.
And it doesnt have to. It has to deal a damage type, which Elemental Escalation does. Its the reason why Elemental Escalation has the varies keyword and Hellfire Touch has the fire keyword for exemple, its because they deal a damage type.
Admixture says, "The power now deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type," however, and EE doesn't deal damage
And it doesnt have to. It has to deal a damage type, which Elemental Escalation does. Its the reason why Elemental Escalation has the varies keyword and Hellfire Touch has the fire keyword for exemple, its because they deal a damage type.
"the power deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type"
does not function when the power in question deals no damage
still doesn't change the type of the extra damage
And it doesnt have to. It has to deal a damage type, which Elemental Escalation does. Its the reason why Elemental Escalation has the varies keyword and Hellfire Touch has the fire keyword for exemple, its because they deal a damage type.[/quote]"the
But like I said, I think almost any DM anywhere would allow it to work if you asked nicely. It's an extremely reasonable thing to ask for, and I wouldn't hesitate to allow it at all.
But if the question is, "does it work this way by RAW?", then the answer is no.
Like Mand said, "the power deals that damage type in addition to its normal damage type" falls apart when the power doesn't deal damage. If EE dealt damage, then it would do the admixtured type in addition to its normal type of damage, and it would work the way you want it to.
Pretend it explicitly deals zero damage, rendering it as follows:
Elemental Escalation (Fire)
As elemental energy flows through you, the rage of your internal inferno infuses it, and you move like a wildfire.
Effect: You can make one additional creature a target of the triggering attack. If the attack’s range is melee or ranged, the additional target must be within 5 squares of you. If the attack’s range is area or close, the additional target must be adjacent to the burst or blast. Before resolving the attack, each target of the attack takes 0 fire damage. Each target hit by the attack takes 1d10 extra damage of the type dealt by the triggering attack. In addition, you shift up to half your speed as a free action.
Using Arcane Admixture (thunder) on EE would change that to:
Elemental Escalation (Fire)
As elemental energy flows through you, the rage of your internal inferno infuses it, and you move like a wildfire.
Effect: You can make one additional creature a target of the triggering attack. If the attack’s range is melee or ranged, the additional target must be within 5 squares of you. If the attack’s range is area or close, the additional target must be adjacent to the burst or blast. Before resolving the attack, each target of the attack takes 0 fire and thunder damage. Each target hit by the attack takes 1d10 extra damage of the type dealt by the triggering attack. In addition, you shift up to half your speed as a free action.
The only damage dealt by EE is that zero damage, so it's the only damage that will be affected by admixture. The extra damage is dealt by the triggering attack, so it is the triggering attack that would have to be admixtured in order to have its damage type affected.
But like I said, I think almost any DM anywhere would allow it to work if you asked nicely. It's an extremely reasonable thing to ask for, and I wouldn't hesitate to allow it at all.But if the question is, "does it work this way by RAW?", then the a
So the power that does no damage on its own can add a damage type to a power that does not have that damage type. Yet you cannot add a damage type to that power, which does no damage on its own, with a feat that says you can.
So the power that does no damage on its own can add a damage type to a power that does not have that damage type. Yet you cannot add a damage type to that power, which does no damage on its own, with a feat that says you can.
Why would Ice Prison get the fire keyword from Elemental Escalation ?
At level 17 Elemental Escalation deals damage. It deals Ongoing damage more specifically. Why would Ice Prison get the fire keyword from Elemental Escalation ?
Because the attack is causing ongoing fire damage, as a result of the EE rider. It's a result of a hit with the base power.
Koshi, yes, that is what I'm saying. Because EE is making another power do things, and every modification that happens to that base power happens to that base power, but modifying the keywords of EE doesn't change what EE does because it doesn't do damage.
Because the attack is causing ongoing fire damage, as a result of the EE rider. It's a result of a hit with the base power.Koshi, yes, that is what I'm saying. Because EE is making another power do things, and every modification that happens to tha
But the point I am trying to make is that the power, EE, has a damage type. Arcane admixture says "add another damage type to the damage type the power already deals"(paraphrasing). There is nothing in the feat that says the power "has to deal damage", "when it deals damage", or anything along those lines.
I do understand what you are saying. I just do not agree. There is nothing in the rules that I can find that states that arcane admixture does nothing to EE. It is an arcane power. It is one you know. It definitely has a damage type. From reading the feat, that is all it is looking for.
But the point I am trying to make is that the power, EE, has a damage type. Arcane admixture says "add another damage type to the damage type the power already deals"(paraphrasing). There is nothing in the feat that says the power "has to deal dama
But the point I am trying to make is that the power, EE, has a damage type. Arcane admixture says "add another damage type to the damage type the power already deals"(paraphrasing). There is nothing in the feat that says the power "has to deal damage", "when it deals damage", or anything along those lines.
I do understand what you are saying. I just do not agree. There is nothing in the rules that I can find that states that arcane admixture does nothing to EE. It is an arcane power. It is one you know. It definitely has a damage type. From reading the feat, that is all it is looking for.
Even after level 17, EE does not deal damage. Saying it "has a damage type" is both misleading and irrelevant.
Adding an additional damage type to EE's zero damage via admixture will not add that additional damage type to the triggering power.
At all levels, EE causes the triggering power to deal additional damage, and after level 17, EE(Fire) causes the triggering power to deal ongoing fire damage.
At this point, arguing with you is becoming tiresome, so please just talk with whoever your DM is about it, because our opinions don't matter, and because regardless of the rules, any DM who doesn't allow it is just being silly.
If you're making it for LFR, though, the RAW still says no, so just admixture Elemental Bolt or Ignition (or Ice Prison) and stop arguing.
Even after level 17, EE does not deal damage. Saying it "has a damage type" is both misleading and irrelevant.Adding an additional damage type to EE's zero damage via admixture will not add that additional damage type to the triggering power. At all
Elemental Escalation at level 17 is dealing damage. Ongoing damage is a form of damage and it has a damage type. I'd say Elemental Escalation at level 17 would add a new damage type to the ongoing damage type if Arcane Admixtured.
Because the attack is causing ongoing fire damage, as a result of the EE rider. It's a result of a hit with the base power.
I disagree. The ongoing damage is not addition to Ice Prison's damage since its not an extra damage. The ongoing damage is not part of the triggering damage in any way. The hit is just what enables it to come into effect.
The ongoing damage is dealt by Elemental Escalation and thus Ice Prison shouldn't gain the fire keyword in Mand12's exemple.
RC 224 Ongoing Damage: Some powers deal damage on consecutive turns after the initial attack. Such damage is called ongoing damage.
Elemental Escalation at level 17 is dealing damage. Ongoing damage is a form of damage and it has a damage type. I'd say Elemental Escalation at level 17 would add a new damage type to the ongoing damage type if Arcane Admixtured. I disagree. The ong
To reach that conclusion though, you have to ignore all of the mechanics about how EE works. Take the additional target. Is it being targeted by EE, or the base power? Answer: Base power.
Everything EE does is a modification to the base power. In this respect it is an extension beyond the simple extra damage rules. It's no different from Mark of Storm, or any of the effects that modify attacks.
To use a contrasting example, Dread Smite is a power that deals damage, and deals ongoing damage. And it's not at all the same as what EE does. "Each target hit by the attack" means that it is a modification to the attack, the entirety of the line.
What you're trying to tell me is that EE can change the targets of an attack, change what happens when an attack hits that target, but the result of that attack isn't being done by the attack. That's not how attacks work. This clearly falls under the category of the result of an attack roll.
To reach that conclusion though, you have to ignore all of the mechanics about how EE works. Take the additional target. Is it being targeted by EE, or the base power? Answer: Base power.Everything EE does is a modification to the base power. In
To reach that conclusion though, you have to ignore all of the mechanics about how EE works. Take the additional target. Is it being targeted by EE, or the base power? Answer: Base power.
I don't ignore anything that Elemental Escalation says. But i don't let it do more than it says, like you do. Additional targets are targeted by The triggering power since Elemental Escalation has no target line.
Everything EE does is a modification to the base power. In this respect it is an extension beyond the simple extra damage rules. It's no different from Mark of Storm, or any of the effects that modify attacks.
Elemental Escalation doesn't say that it modify all the power does. It make one additional creature a target of the triggering attack. And Mark of Storm is a Feat enought controversial please don't bring it onto this discussion. But if you do, you know my take on it. The Forced Movement doesn't have to be part of the attack to occur. Same here for the ongoing damage.:P
To use a contrasting example, Dread Smite is a power that deals damage, and deals ongoing damage. And it's not at all the same as what EE does. "Each target hit by the attack" means that it is a modification to the attack, the entirety of the line.
Not because the Power tells you what each target of the triggering power takes some effects that these effect inherently becomes effect dealt by the triggering power. In the same vein, a Power such as Kord's Favor doesn't make the triggering attack heal yourself and gain the Healing keyword since it is delivered by Kord's Favor itself. The Extra damage are in additions to the triggering attack's damage because they say they do. Ongoing damage are not in addition's to other damage and is thus dealt by Elemental Escalation. Ongoing damaging Powers such as Unleash Corruption, Hasten The End and Elemental Chains have the cold & necrotic or the varies keyword because they deals (ongoing) damage of the type associated with it.
What you're trying to tell me is that EE can change the targets of an attack, change what happens when an attack hits that target, but the result of that attack isn't being done by the attack. That's not how attacks work. This clearly falls under the category of the result of an attack roll.
Elemental Escalation doesn't change what happen to triggering attack when it hit. It adds additional target and (grant the ability to) deal extra damage (added to the triggering attack's damage) and deal ongoing damage (not added to the triggering attack's damage).
I don't ignore anything that Elemental Escalation says. But i don't let it do more than it says, like you do. Additional targets are targeted by The triggering power since Elemental Escalation has no target line. Elemental Escalation doesn't say that
Elemental Escalation doesn't change what happen to triggering attack when it hit.
Yes, it does. That's what those effect lines are for. The part where it says "each target hit by the attack (blahblahblah)."
Your logic is the same as in the argument that Mark of Storm can't trigger Polearm Momentum - and it has been rejected.
Yes, it does. That's what those effect lines are for. The part where it says "each target hit by the attack (blahblahblah)."Your logic is the same as in the argument that Mark of Storm can't trigger Polearm Momentum - and it has been rejected.
Don't change subject with Mark of Storm please. (And not everyone rejected it BTW)
A triggered effect doesn't become inherently part of the triggering effect simply because it triggers it. Elemental Escalation at level 17 says:
Elemental Escalation EncounterArcane, Elemental, Varies Free ActionPersonal Trigger: You use a sorcerer at-will attack power. Effect: Each target hit by the attack takes 1d10 extra damage, and ongoing 10 fire damage (save ends).
This in itself doesn't make the ongoing damage part of the sorcerer at-will attack power is all i am saying. While the extra damage may not be dealt by Elemental Escalation's effect but the sorcerer's attack's damage, the ongoing damage certainly is.
Don't change subject with Mark of Storm please. (And not everyone rejected it BTW)A triggered effect doesn't become inherently part of the triggering effect simply because it triggers it.Elemental Escalation at level 17 says:Elemental EscalationEncou
It's not changing the subject, it's demonstrating the inconsistency of your argument.
If we're to the point where you're telling me that an effect that happens when an attack hits a target isn't part of "attack roll and its effects" then we're at an impasse. You're completely wrong on this case, for numerous reasons which I've already described in detail.
Final question, before I give up on you completely:
"Each target hit by the attack takes 10 ongoing fire damage."
If Elemental Escalation is dealing the ongoing fire damage, on its own, how does it determine which creatures are targets? How does it determine which creatures are hit?
It's not changing the subject, it's demonstrating the inconsistency of your argument.If we're to the point where you're telling me that an effect that happens when an attack hits a target isn't part of "attack roll and its effects" then we're at an i
The inconcistency is in your extrapolation on the interactions between the two powers, i simply stick to what the power says it does and nothing more.
The Effect of Elemental Escalation tells you who gets the extra damage and the ongoing damage (''each target hit by the attack'' is the target designator), just like Unleash Corruption, Hasten The End, or Elemental Chains do in their Effect line designate who's affected. All those powers deal ongoing damage when being triggered and all have the associated damage type keyword - because they do deal this damage type effect.
The inconcistency is in your extrapolation on the interactions between the two powers, i simply stick to what the power says it does and nothing more. The Effect of Elemental Escalation tells you who gets the extra damage and the ongoing damage (''ea
You say you stick to what the power does, but you're not. The power says that something else happens on a hit. Under all of the effects that do something like that, the effect becomes part of a hit, and part of the attack. Whether it's extra damage or ongoing damage or the slide or the fly-half-your-speed is irrelevant.
How you don't recognize this as blatantly inconsistent with consensus about effect riders is beyond me.
You say you stick to what the power does, but you're not. The power says that something else happens on a hit. Under all of the effects that do something like that, the effect becomes part of a hit, and part of the attack. Whether it's extra damag
You say you stick to what the power does, but you're not. The power says that something else happens on a hit. Under all of the effects that do something like that, the effect becomes part of a hit, and part of the attack. Whether it's extra damage or ongoing damage or the slide or the fly-half-your-speed is irrelevant.
Can you cite the rule that say this because no rules do AKAIK. If all those powers wouldn't deal ongoing damage they woudn't have the associated damage keyword present in a power when this damage type is dealt by the power. Just because you refuse to acknowledge that doesn't make it false. And i don't think such concensus exist for powers.
No where in the rules does it even say once what you claim triggered powers do. So i can only come to the conclusion that triggered powers effects don't become inherently part of their triggering power hit line since no rule say they do. Only exception is for extra damage which explicitly say so.
RC 114 Damage Type: If a power has one of these keywords, it deals the associated type of damage.
Can you cite the rule that say this because no rules do AKAIK. If all those powers wouldn't deal ongoing damage they woudn't have the associated damage keyword present in a power when this damage type is dealt by the power. Just because you refuse t
Definition of attack doesn't say: ''Under all of the effects that do something like that, the effect becomes part of a hit, and part of the attack'' anywhere go look again.
Definition of attack doesn't say: ''Under all of the effects that do something like that, the effect becomes part of a hit, and part of the attack'' anywhere go look again.
As I said before, if you're really trying to argue that an effect that is described as the result of a hit isn't part of the attack, then we're at an impasse.
By your argument even the hit line of powers wouldn't be part of the attack. Part of the attack power, yes, but not part of the "attack roll and its effects" definition.
What rule is there that says that the Hit line of a power is part of the attack?
If you insist on this hyper-reductionist perspective, then you quickly get into stupid things like "Well, there's no rule telling me to read on page 287 before I started using my character, so none of that applies to what I'm doing."
As I said before, if you're really trying to argue that an effect that is described as the result of a hit isn't part of the attack, then we're at an impasse.By your argument even the hit line of powers wouldn't be part of the attack. Part of the at
A hit line is part of the attack definition because its an effect resulting from the attack roll. But this does not necessarly apply to other seperate triggered power's effect that can be used when you hit a target.
Otherwise Deadly Smite, to take your earlier exemple, would be a damage dealt by the triggering power by your definition and would thus gain the cold and necrotic keyword but we know it doesn't do this because its not a extra damage and so Deadly Smite is not a damage dealt in addition to the triggering attack's damage. To contrast, Assassin's Shroud's damage is in addition to the triggering attack's damage because it say so in the power otherwise it wouldn't because its not an extra damage.
A triggered power's effect come into effect because the trigger is met, but doesn't become part of the triggering event inherently. Otherwise any triggered teleport effect would convey the teleportation keyword to the triggering power, any triggered healing effect would convey the healing keyword to the triggering power etc..As i said previously, a Power such as Kord's Favor doesn't make the triggering attack heal yourself and gain the Healing keyword since it is delivered by Kord's Favor itself even if it can only be used when you hit with an attack.
A hit line is part of the attack definition because its an effect resulting from the attack roll. But this does not necessarly apply to other seperate triggered power's effect that can be used when you hit a target. Otherwise Deadly Smite, to take yo
Elemental Escalation is not caused by the result of an attack roll but by using a sorcerer at-will attack power. :P
''Each target hit by the attack takes'' is the determinant for who gets the damaging effect and not the trigger causing the effect.
Trigger: You use a sorcerer at-will attack power.
Elemental Escalation is not caused by the result of an attack roll but by using a sorcerer at-will attack power. :P''Each target hit by the attack takes'' is the determinant for who gets the damaging effect and not the trigger causing the effect.
No your point is that its a hit effect. Don't steal my point
''Each creatures hit by the attack takes'' is a target designator for a different triggered power's effect, not a Hit effect.
No your point is that its a hit effect. Don't steal my point ''Each creatures hit by the attack takes'' is a target designator for a different triggered power's effect, not a Hit effect.
As I said before, if you're really claiming that the result of a hit determination of an attack roll isn't part of an attack, then we're at an impasse. We've now devolved to the NO U stage of debating. Unless someone else can chime in with something new, we could go in circles forever. Or not.
As I said before, if you're really claiming that the result of a hit determination of an attack roll isn't part of an attack, then we're at an impasse. We've now devolved to the NO U stage of debating. Unless someone else can chime in with somethin
I am not claiming that the result of a hit determination of an attack roll isn't part of an attack, i am claiming that designating a target (that has been hit by an attack) for an effect doesn't make it part of the attack.
You really see no difference between these two hypothetical powers below ? Only one of them would be in addition to the triggering attack's damage and be maxed if it was a Crit. Yet on your opinion both are identical and their effect become part of the triggering attack hit's effect. I say only the Power B's effect will be part of the the triggering attack because the extra damage rules say so.
In the same vein Elemental Escalation's effect has extra damage (in addition to the triggering attack's damage) and ongoing damage (not in addition to the triggering attack's damage)
Power A Power B Trigger: You hit a creature with an attack Trigger: You hit a creature with an attack Effect: The target hit by the attack take 2d6 damage Effect: The target hit by the attack take 2d6 extra damage
I am not claiming that the result of a hit determination of an attack roll isn't part of an attack, i am claiming that designating a target (that has been hit by an attack) for an effect doesn't make it part of the attack. You really see no differenc
Power A Power B Trigger: You hit a creature with an attack Trigger: You hit a creature with an attack Effect: The target hit by the attack take 2d6 damage Effect: The target hit by the attack take 2d6 extra damage
I think where I stop agreeing with you is when the trigger changes from "you hit a creature with an attack" to, "you use a sorcerer at-will power."
If EE required the hit before any of its effect lines, it would be perfectly fine with me to resolve the at-will power separately, and to consider the level 17+ ongoing damage to have come from EE.
Because it does not, AND because the damage is listed as extra damage (and there's nothing in the rules about "extra ongoing damage"), it resolves at the same time as the triggering power, with all of the effects of EE being passed on to the triggering power for resolution.
But, for a third time, I feel the need to stress how incredibly unimportant our opinions on the matter are. The OP should just ask his/her DM to allow it, and the DM should say yes, because regardless of rules lawyering, it's an exceedingly reasonable request, and it doesn't break or even hurt anything to have it work in the desired fashion. My personal preference as someone who's played a fire elementalist would be to just admixture my at-wills anyway (cold for EB, thunder for ignition), but I can see why someone might want to do it to EE instead.
I think where I stop agreeing with you is when the trigger changes from "you hit a creature with an attack" to, "you use a sorcerer at-will power." If EE required the hit before any of its effect lines, it would be perfectly fine with me to resolve t
@Nirafelos - I know the Trigger is not the same i was using a hyppothetical exemple to demonstrate the hole in Mand12's argument about triggering power's effect supposedly becoming part of their triggered power's Hit line.
Bottom line is this, Elemental Escalation tells you who takes extra damage and ongoing damage without saying which power deals it between the triggering power and Elemental Escalation. In the absence of such information, i think the default assumption should be that the power delivers its effect (to the exception of extra damage which is in additions to the attack's damage).
@Zathris - Echoing Weapon specifically says the next weapon attack deals 2d6 thunder damage so its not even disputable who deals it.
@Nirafelos - I know the Trigger is not the same i was using a hyppothetical exemple to demonstrate the hole in Mand12's argument about triggering power's effect supposedly becoming part of their triggered power's Hit line. Bottom line is this, Elemen
You say you stick to what the power does, but you're not. The power says that something else happens on a hit. Under all of the effects that do something like that, the effect becomes part of a hit, and part of the attack. Whether it's extra damage or ongoing damage or the slide or the fly-half-your-speed is irrelevant.
Can you cite the rule that say this because no rules do AKAIK. If all those powers wouldn't deal ongoing damage they woudn't have the associated damage keyword present in a power when this damage type is dealt by the power. Just because you refuse to acknowledge that doesn't make it false. And i don't think such concensus exist for powers.
No where in the rules does it even say once what you claim triggered powers do. So i can only come to the conclusion that triggered powers effects don't become inherently part of their triggering power hit line since no rule say they do. Only exception is for extra damage which explicitly say so.
RC 114 Damage Type: If a power has one of these keywords, it deals the associated type of damage.
I believe that adding a damage type to a power does not affect OGD. As the power is not doing the damage
Can you cite the rule that say this because no rules do AKAIK. If all those powers wouldn't deal ongoing damage they woudn't have the associated damage keyword present in a power when this damage type is dealt by the power. Just because you refuse t
Arcane, Elemental, Varies
