|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 11:27AM
#21
|
|
|
Nope, that's a false dichotomy. "At least one of this weapon's damage dice" means "at least one of the [w] dice of the attack", seamlessly conforming to both the wording of the weapon property and to the definition of "damage dice". He is still wrong, and now you are wrong as well. Good day.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 11:48AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Jan 21, 2011
|
No, Alcestis is right.
Carnage property:
"When you roll the maximum result on at least one of this weapon’s damage dice, the target takes extra damage equal to twice the weapon’s enhancement bonus."
If we go by your interpretation, that "this weapon's damage dice" means the [W] of the mundane weapon the enchantment is placed on then "this weapon's damage dice" cannot be plural. It is and can only be [W]. Ever. And so not only is the word "dice" wrong, the "at least one" part ceases to have any meaning whatsoever.
If, instead, "this weapons damage dice" means the dice that the magic weapon is dealing in damage, then the wording actually is grammatically correct, and the property has all of the words in it ("at least one" being the most important part) actually function.
Regardless of what you think the RC says about weapons and damage dice, the property says how it works, and how it works only is how it says if you go with the latter interpretation.
What erachima said. "At least one of this weapon's damage dice" = "at least one [W] of this weapon." It can still be plural, because it is entirely possible (and common) for damage rolls to have more than one [W] get rolled.
If it strikes you as gramatically incorrect then I think you're seriously overthinking it.
I am okay with you saying my argument is stupid, or commits the munchkin fallacy, or any other bad thing you want. Particularly if you give a reason/explanation for it.
However, I will ignore any post that calls me stupid, or a munchkin, or what have you. Not because it bothers me; I've just found that people only start name-calling when that's the best argument they have left.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 11:56AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
How does this little barney interact with Brutal?
Also, how do you know which dice of the whole mess of identical d6s or 4s or whatever you're rolling, are a given [W]?
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 12:19PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Brutal is a good point.
A brutal weapon’s minimum damage is higher than that of a normal weapon. When rolling the weapon’s damage, reroll any die that displays a value equal to or lower than the brutal value given for the weapon. Reroll the die until the value shown exceeds the weapon’s brutal value, and then use the new value.
Under your interpretation, a Mordenkrad can't function, because 2d6 B1 can't ever come up 1.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 12:49PM
#25
|
|
|
Both are valid readings. As such, we need to wait for a FAQ or errata (i.e. it will never end).
guides
Show
my builds
Show
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.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 1:00PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Apr 25, 2002
|
Brutal is a good point.
A brutal weapon’s minimum damage is higher than that of a normal weapon. When rolling the weapon’s damage, reroll any die that displays a value equal to or lower than the brutal value given for the weapon. Reroll the die until the value shown exceeds the weapon’s brutal value, and then use the new value.
Under your interpretation, a Mordenkrad can't function, because 2d6 B1 can't ever come up 1.
Brutal doesn't say damage dice, which is a specific game term aka W, it says any die.
Not arguing either way at the moment, just pointing out this doesn't really have anything to do with Brutal.
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author) Handbooks
Show
Builds
Show
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 1:02PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Jan 21, 2011
|
Brutal is a good point.
A brutal weapon’s minimum damage is higher than that of a normal weapon. When rolling the weapon’s damage, reroll any die that displays a value equal to or lower than the brutal value given for the weapon. Reroll the die until the value shown exceeds the weapon’s brutal value, and then use the new value.
Under your interpretation, a Mordenkrad can't function, because 2d6 B1 can't ever come up 1.
Different context. If it says "weapon's damage die," specifically, that has a very particularly defined meaning which is [W]. This isn't an interpretation, it's outright stated on RC 273. This is not the first time that they defined things in a particular way that didn't match with the colloquial usage (...and then caused problems later).
For brutal, the wording is slightly different, because it just refers to a die that is part of rolling damage, rather than the *specifically defined* phrase "weapon's damage die." It must be using the colloquial definition, because it talks about the displayed value of a die, which means it's referring to something physical and not the abstract [W] definition.
Yes, it's ugly. Overloading the definition of a word always ends up ugly (like we see with "attack" all the time). But otherwise you're outright ignoring a rule.
(For reference, from RC 273, emphasis added: "If the weapon's damage die is an expression of multiple dice, roll that number of dice the indicated number of times. For instance, a greatclub (which has a damage die of 2d4) ...")
I am okay with you saying my argument is stupid, or commits the munchkin fallacy, or any other bad thing you want. Particularly if you give a reason/explanation for it.
However, I will ignore any post that calls me stupid, or a munchkin, or what have you. Not because it bothers me; I've just found that people only start name-calling when that's the best argument they have left.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 1:05PM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Brutal uses the same language, it is relevant.
If "weapon's damage" in brutal means anything other than [W], then brutal would apply to that damage. Except the consensus is that it doesn't, it only applies to [W], and that consensus has been rock-solid for ages. Are you really prepared to say that rogues should try to get a brutal weapon to enhance their Sneak Attack damage?
The brutal ruling and the ruling saying that Carnage isn't as good with 2dX weapons are inconsistent, and not applying "weapon damage" in the same fashion. Inconsistency is at least a reason to question the interpretation.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 1:10PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Apr 25, 2002
|
Brutal uses the same language, it is relevant.
If "weapon's damage" in brutal means anything other than [W], then brutal would apply to that damage. Except the consensus is that it doesn't, it only applies to [W], and that consensus has been rock-solid for ages. Are you really prepared to say that rogues should try to get a brutal weapon to enhance their Sneak Attack damage?
The brutal ruling and the ruling saying that Carnage isn't as good with 2dX weapons are inconsistent, and not applying "weapon damage" in the same fashion. Inconsistency is at least a reason to question the interpretation.
No, they have different terms.
Carnage weapon = When you roll the maximum result on at least one of this weapon’s damage dice
Brutal = When rolling the weapon’s damage, reroll any die that displays a value equal to or lower than the brutal value given for the weapon. Reroll the die until the value shown exceeds the weapon’s brutal value, and then use the new value.
A die is not necessarily a damage dice. But a damage dice looks to be by RAW a W, even if potentially, they didn't mean that.
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author) Handbooks
Show
Builds
Show
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 1:21PM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Mar 28, 2010
|
it's close but I have to agree it's not the same.
"Non nobis Domine Sed nomini tuo da gloriam" "I wish for death not because I want to die, but because I seek the war eternal"
|
|
|
