Post/Author/DateTime	Post
billboyjones 09-22-04, 01:38 PM	Hi. Me again, with another probably simple question. I'm wondering about the bane special ability that can be placed on weapons. When I take my +1 shortsword (attack: [MAB] + 1; damage: 1d6 + [STR] + 1) and add bane to it, do I need to track the bane damage as a separate type of damage as in: attack: [MAB] + 3; damage: 1d6 + [STR] + 2d6 [bane] + 3 or can I just say attack: [MAB] + 3; damage: 3d6 + [STR] + 3 The reason I'm wondering is because of the colors of my dice. I want to just use 3 black dice for my damage roll, but my friend is telling me that bane damage is a separate damage granted by the weapon enchantment and thus needs to be tracked differently (as in different colored dice) - in case of damage reduction or something along those lines.
Huan 09-22-04, 02:27 PM	When fighting against the enemy of the bane, it doesn't really matter much, since the damage it will be the same (3d6 + [STR] + 3). But I think your question is HOW you should roll it ... Bane damage IS separate damage granted by a weapon enhacenment, but I suppose the only reason you would roll one die, then the two for bane, would be to account for any damage reduction your weapon may not be bypassing. So yeah, I guess you might as well play it safe and roll them separately.
Dunbar 09-22-04, 03:29 PM	Hmmm...I thought that bane damage was just added physical damage. Like the added +5 dmg from a +5 sword. Not a type of damage, the way a flaming sword does +1d6 fire damage. Let's look at the 3.5 SRD: Bane: A bane weapon excels at attacking one type or subtype of creature. Against its designated foe, its effective enhancement bonus is +2 better than its normal enhancement bonus. It deals an extra 2d6 points of damage against the foe. Compared to the entry for flaming: Flaming: Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given. A flaming weapon deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit. Since there is no type given for the bane damage, it's just added weapon damage isn't it? But then I looked at the entry for holy: Holy: A holy weapon is imbued with holy power. This power makes the weapon good-aligned and thus bypasses the corresponding damage reduction. It deals an extra 2d6 points of damage against all of evil alignment This threw me because I thought holy weapons did holy damage. So I had a look at the 3.0 SRD: Holy A holy weapon deals +2d6 points of bonus holy (good) damage against all of evil alignment Interesting. Also, in the 3.0 SRD, the definition of bane is the same as in 3.5; the bonus damage is just damage. So it seems that bane weapons never added "bane" damage, just added weapon damage. Holy weapons used to add holy damage, but now it seems they just add to weapon damage against evil foes. So they do not get to bypass DR, though they will help your weapon punch through it.
Huan 09-22-04, 07:20 PM	Well, there you have it; good job Dunbar ... I guess you better warm up your 3 black dice then, billyboy (don't forget your wpn's effective enhancement bonus is +2 better than its normal enhancement bonus vs the right enemy!)
masterofmayhem 09-22-04, 09:03 PM	Just a few things: 1) The extra damage dice granted by a bane weapon does not automatically bypass the DR of the creature it is set against. It does, however, make it more likely that you will do so. 2) Remember that the extra dice will not be multiplied on a critical (although the extra +2 enhancement bonus will). 3) If this is 3.0, well, ignore what is above; it may be different than 3.5 4) If it is 3.0, remember that a +1 bane sword gets through DR/+3 of the creature it is designed to hurt. 5) I believe that the extra damage dice would be whatever the weapon type is (i.e., slashing from a longsword). I'm not sure about that, though. Ick, those indent things don't work too well.
tmagann 09-23-04, 01:18 AM	2) Remember that the extra dice will not be multiplied on a critical (although the extra +2 enhancement bonus will). I'm not so sure about that. As already established, this is normal damage, same as the extra +2. It's not crit or sneak attack, or there wouldn't be an undead bane. It's not holy, or elemental, or any of that. So, it would seem to me that either both the +2 and the +2d6 are multiplied or neither are.
Naeron 09-23-04, 07:26 AM	<snip> Interesting. Also, in the 3.0 SRD, the definition of bane is the same as in 3.5; the bonus damage is just damage. So it seems that bane weapons never added "bane" damage, just added weapon damage. Holy weapons used to add holy damage, but now it seems they just add to weapon damage against evil foes. So they do not get to bypass DR, though they will help your weapon punch through it. Yes holy will help bypass DR, you are missing the first part - "This power makes the weapon good-aligned" which means all the weapon's damage gets through DR /good and is not regenerated by creatures that take lethal damage from good sources. The aligned enchantments all have a similar statement. The extra damage with a bane weapon doesn't bypass DR it just helps you beat it (especially in 3.5 where the average extra 9 damage is nice vs the common 10 and 15 point DRs). I'm not so sure about that. As already established, this is normal damage, same as the extra +2. It's not crit or sneak attack, or there wouldn't be an undead bane. It's not holy, or elemental, or any of that. So, it would seem to me that either both the +2 and the +2d6 are multiplied or neither are. No only the +2 multiplies, SRD "Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied." Bane and the aligned weapons give extra damage dice so they don't multiply just as a flaming weapon doesn't muliply the d6. However for a bane weapon the +2 to enhancement will count towards the multiplication as enhancement bonuses are not extra damage dice.
tmagann 09-23-04, 10:24 AM	No only the +2 multiplies, SRD "Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied." Bane and the aligned weapons give extra damage dice so they don't multiply just as a flaming weapon doesn't muliply the d6. However for a bane weapon the +2 to enhancement will count towards the multiplication as enhancement bonuses are not extra damage dice. Not, not extra damage dice just extra damage and of the same type. My point is that, if one is multiplied both are, and if one isn't, either are. They are the same type of damage (normal) and both only affect certain types of crature (bane). Now, the PHB, which I prefer over the SRD, simply because I spent $30 on it, say *damage* over and above. Not damage dice. So, again, it seems both or neither. By the printed rules, even strength bonuses don't multiply, it would seem. anything that says some of the extra does and some doesn't would seem to be a house rule. And yes, it would seem that the free and editied rules on the site disagree with the expensive and from the store. I'm of the opinion that you get what you pay for. But that's me.
masterofmayhem 09-23-04, 10:38 AM	Play how you will. It certainly would not be imbalancing to allow them to multiply on a critical, since bane weapons only excel against a specified creature type. The +2, however, would definitely multiply. However, keep this in mind: From the 3.5 SRD: Additional Damage Dice: Some magic weapons deal additional dice of damage. Unlike other modifiers to damage, additional dice of damage are not multiplied when the attacker scores a critical hit. That's from the description on magic weapons. If that doesn't convince you, you are too set in your ways to have your opinion changed. As I said earlier, it would certainly not be imblancing to give bane weapons a little more kick against thei specified enemy.
Heron_Marked_Blade 09-23-04, 11:00 AM	Masterofmayhem and Naeron are correct. Extra damage from a bane weapon (or any extra damage from a weapon special ability) is not multiplied on a critical hit. Enhancement bonuses to damage, however, are multiplied, as is damage from a high STR. You should roll two colored dice for the bane damage, or roll weapon damage and bane damage separately.
tmagann 09-23-04, 11:18 AM	That's from the description on magic weapons. If that doesn't convince you, you are too set in your ways to have your opinion changed. OK, I'm not sure how going by the PHB rather than the SRD makes me set in my ways. But it cuts both ways. if the PHB isn't good enough, maybe YOU are too set in your ways? In point of fact, the DMG does imply that any bonus that isn't rolled is multiplied. That agrees with the part of the SRD you're quoting, but I tend to wonder if the SRD bit on critical damage (rather than the bit on magical weapons) doesn't say something a little different. And that's the difference: The PHB is definitive, the DMG counters it by implication only, so there would seem to be a bit of discrepancy. What does the SRD say under criticals? Remember, I've been called set in my ways for checking more than one place, now.... :)
RaspK FOG 09-23-04, 11:50 AM	Actually, WotC has been quite adamant in their statements regarding extra damage dice more than once: they never count as "weapon damage", that's why they are always referred to as "extra" or "additional damage dice". The part you refer to from the PHB is making a reference to any damage dice you roll based on the physical built of a weapon you are using: a scythe uses 2d4 (Large weapon in 3e, Medium weapon in 3.5e [the Revised 3rd Edition refers to weapons in terms of object size]), while a Huge/Large scythe would use 2d6 to determine its damage; likewise, greatswords use 2d6. Whatever you do, you multiply the damage dice (NOT the roll result) plus any constants by the critical multiplier of the weapon, then add bonus damage dice. Any and all damage is accounted for from the same strike to determine if it bypasses DR except for energy or spell-induced damage which always bypasses DR.
tmagann 09-23-04, 12:01 PM	You folks aren't getting it: I'm not FOR doubling damage dice, I'm AGAINST doubling ANY magical add to damage. Hummm... Let's try it this way: The PHB says that the *usual* bonuses are multiplied (I'll point out again, that the word 'dice' is not used, just 'damage'). What's the definition of 'usual'?. Strength? yes, you always get it. Enemy types? no, only specific enemies, and not to all of them. Any not subject to criticals don't take this, implying it's aready a crit bonus Power attack? You always have the option, so, yes? Weapon specilization? only affects a particular weapon. probably not Magic? Everyone says yes, but it only affects a specific weapon, not even a weapon class. Magic isn't 'usual' even in a magical setting, it's a special add on. Bane +2? It's a magical enemy type. Not 'usual', not for the weapon class, not everytime you use the weapon, just under *special* circumstances. Hardly 'usual' although some campaigns may make it seem so. More like ranger's enemy bonus Again, the DMG *implies* all point based damage (vice dice based damage), is doubled, but the PHB *says* only specific point based damage is doubled. Which brings us to my original point, which wasn't that the bane dice should be doubled, rather that the bane points should NOT be doubled. Nor any other artifical adds to damage, point or dice. NO magical damage or special circumstance damage should be doubled. You folks seem to be saying that a LITTLE should be doubled, but a LOT shouldn't be. I guess it's all in how you define 'usual'. And, no, my opinion probably won't be changed after this close reading of the printed rules. But, if a refusal to change opinons to agree with someone else make me set in my ways, as was pointed out above, well, then, I guess we all are. :)
RaspK FOG 09-23-04, 12:14 PM	What I talked about are the official rules: constants are always mutliplied, be it a critical hit or an empowered spell.
tmagann 09-23-04, 12:22 PM	What I talked about are the official rules: constants are always mutliplied, be it a critical hit or an empowered spell. And again, I can't find a rule that actually says that, and no one is showing it to me. I find rules that say variable damage isn't doubled, and that usual damage is doubled, but nothing that says ALL constant damage is doubled, or even that 'usual' means 'constant' Quite the oposite, I've found reason that some constant damage ISN'T doubled (doubling the crit damage of a ranger enemy bonus on a crit?), and the word 'usual' being used, where 'constant'. But hey, it's pointless to continue. People are going to do what they want for whatever reason suits them.
d_nychus 09-23-04, 12:41 PM	Then why are you arguing against someone? Seriously, the entire reason people started criticizing your methods was because you claimed that something was true by the rules, when it is not. If you are just going to do whatever you want, why bother arguing with the rules, especially when someone asks about the rules in particular?
tmagann 09-23-04, 01:10 PM	Then why are you arguing against someone? Seriously, the entire reason people started criticizing your methods was because you claimed that something was true by the rules, when it is not. If you are just going to do whatever you want, why bother arguing with the rules, especially when someone asks about the rules in particular? Actually, at first, the entire reason people started criticizining my methods is because they assumed I was saying that damage dice should be doubled, when I was saying the opposite: that magic bonuses should not be doubled. I AM asking about a particular rule, but no one is pointing me to it. Hell, I was told I was too set in my ways for thinking damage dice was doubled, when I NEVER thought so. My point is: I *have* an open mind, but you have to back up the statements with a reference if you are going to claim it's a hard and fast rule, and no one has. They've pointed to one rule to tell me how wrong I was about doubling dice (even though I agreed with them), but when I keep pointing to another reference, it's either ignored, or someone adds in words that aren't there. Where does it say *constant* damage is multiplied? That's all I want to know. So, that's why I'm still discussing it: I actually want to know what the rules mean, rather than assuming I'm right and refusing to look at something that might show me to be in error. But no one can seem to show it to me, so I guess, when it comes down to it, I'm done and only posting this time because you asked me a question, and I'm giving you the courtesy of an answer.
d_nychus 09-23-04, 01:37 PM	Read the glossary entry on critical hits, for either 3.0 or 3.5. A hit that strikes a vital area and therefore deals double damage or more. To score a critical hit (crit), an attacker must first score a threat (usually a natural 20 on an attack roll) and then succeed on a critical roll (just like another attack roll). Critical hit damage is usually double damage, which means rolling damage twice, just as if the attacker had actually hit the defender two times. (Any extra damage dice, such as from a rogue's sneak attack, are not rolled multiple times, but are added to the total at the end of the calculation.) That means that if you roll 2d6+7 for damage, and you score a critical hit, you really roll 2d6+7 and then a second 2d6+7 for damage, or, in otherwords, 4d6+14, the same as doubling the damage. However, if it were 2d6+7+2d6, the damage would be 2d6+7 + 2d6+7 + 2d6 damage.
tmagann 09-23-04, 02:01 PM	No, that means that the usual damage is doubled, and that extra dice aren't usual. The word 'usually' appears here, too, but, again, not 'constant'. You separate normal weapon damage from magical damage in your example, but only for the extra dice, not the extra points. +3 magic is no more usual that +2d6 magic. My point is not that it's 2d6+7 +2d6+7 +2d6, but that it's 2d6+4 +2d6+4 +2d6+3. The difference? I separated out ALL the damage that was of the same type (magic) and only doubled the *usual* damage for the weapon and the strength. And that's the point I'm making: The rules say ONLY 'usual' IS doubled. They say extra dice are NOT doubled, but nowhere do they say extra points ARE doubled. They do seem to be saying magic damage is NOT usual, though, nor is special ability damage (they use rogue exta as an example, but wouldn't ranger extra be just as unusual? Just weaker). And that's what I've been asking for: A reference that says what damage IS doubled, rather than what ISN'T. So far all I've found or been shown that shows what IS doubled is 'usual bonuses'. And the examples of what isn't seem to be clear: Anything unusual, magic and special abilities, have been excluded, a has anything not typical to an ordinary weapon and the wielder's strength. But, again, if you can show me something that states what IS added, rather than what isn't....
d_nychus 09-23-04, 02:37 PM	Okay, now this is just getting ridiculous. The term "usual" in there is refering to the DOUBLING bonus. As in, sometimes the damage is tripled or quadrupled. NOWHERE is the magic enhancement bonus separated from damage in ANY listings. You are adding that in without any reason in the rules. If you have a flat bonus to damage, it is added to the die roll, and ALL the flat bonuses are added together. Enhancement bonuses are flat damage, not additional dice. Look at the examples of NPCs listed in the DMG, and their damage. Look at any entry in the MM where magic weapons are invovled. The Balor's vorpal sword, the trumpet archon, the vampire samples. NONE of them separate magic damage. The fact is, if you have a magic enhancement on a weapon, for any reason, be it the normal effect of the weapon, OR the result of attacking an opponent that the weapon has the bane effect against, the damage is added to the die roll, and that is the damage roll that is made for critical hits. In all of these cases, the magic enhancement bonus to damage is included with the Strength bonus to damage in one single number. Now, really, are you saying you are supposed to separate these out into component numbers whenever you score a critical hit? If that were the case, why is it not separated out like WotC do for AC? No, those are all one listed damage roll, and that is what is rolled multiple times in a critical hit. What you are asking for is impossible, and you know it. There IS no direct listing of what is and is not added to a die roll, because there is no NEED for it. The book states that extra damage is added to a die roll and all of that die roll is multiplied whenever there is a critical hit, unless that damage is represented by additional dice.
Heron_Marked_Blade 09-23-04, 02:46 PM	d_nychus is correct. Damage from an enhancement bonus is part of normal damage. Nowhere does the damage entry from a +2 longsword wielded by a 14 STR character state that the damage is 1d8 + 2 (STR) + 2 (enhancement). The damage dealt is 1d8+4. On a critical hit, the longsword deals 1d8+4 + 1d8+4. A +2 longsword of orc bane has an effective enhancement bonus of +4 against orcs. Against orcs (and wielded by the above character), the weapon deals 1d8+6 + 2d6 damage (from the bane special ability). On a critical hit, the weapon deals 1d8+6 + 1d8+6 + 2d6 damage. Weapon damage is multiplied on a critical hit. Special ability damage (extra dice, whether from a magical special ability or a rogue's special ability [sneak attack]) is not multiplied on a critical hit.
tmagann 09-23-04, 02:57 PM	Now this is just getting strange. No, they don't say it ISN'T doubled under the magic weapons. They dont' say it IS, either. They also dont' say that 'magic' = 'normal' what they say is that the extra damage is MAGIC. I found the reference I was looking for on my own, as it happens, under 'weapon qualities' in the equipment section of the PHB. In 3.0, yes, if it isn't dice, it's doubled. HOWEVER, in 3.5 that isn't true. Page 114, they specify that "Extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage".... "is not multiplied when you score a critical hit." They use examples (which I've snipped) of a class based attack, and the "special ability" of a flaming weapon, but, while the examples used both do dice of damage, they don't specify dice, just normal vs special ability. Ithe editted and updated version of the rules, they have removed 'bonus dice' and add The extra +2 of the bane weapon is certainly part of the bane special ability. Hence, it's specifically barred from muliplication, which is what I was saying in my first post. Agree or not, but it IS a special feature of the bane, and "special abilities" of magic weapons (not "dice resulting from special abilities") are not multiplied. Again, page 114 PHB. Ranger damage is not *weapon* damage, anymore that sneak attack damage is, hence, it too would be barred from multiplication. If your DM considers a magical addition to a weapon to be usual, more power to you. I don't consider an artifical additon to be 'normal'. And I certainly don't consider something that DOES result from a special ability to well, NOT result from a special ability. We're now reduced to semantic games and hair splitting, so I'll use Ockham's Razor and assume they mean what they say, rather than they mean what they don't say.
d_nychus 09-23-04, 03:40 PM	Now this is just getting strange. No, they don't say it ISN'T doubled under the magic weapons. They dont' say it IS, either. They also dont' say that 'magic' = 'normal' what they say is that the extra damage is MAGIC. I found the reference I was looking for on my own, as it happens, under 'weapon qualities' in the equipment section of the PHB. In 3.0, yes, if it isn't dice, it's doubled. HOWEVER, in 3.5 that isn't true. Page 114, they specify that "Extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage".... "is not multiplied when you score a critical hit." They use examples (which I've snipped) of a class based attack, and the "special ability" of a flaming weapon, but, while the examples used both do dice of damage, they don't specify dice, just normal vs special ability. Ithe editted and updated version of the rules, they have removed 'bonus dice' and add Or you could turn to the glossary and realize that that is poor way of reading the rule. But, you know, if you want to try to prove your point more than actually being right, go ahead. Not that the listed examples of "extra damage" are all additional dice or anything important like that. The extra +2 of the bane weapon is certainly part of the bane special ability. Hence, it's specifically barred from muliplication, which is what I was saying in my first post. Agree or not, but it IS a special feature of the bane, and "special abilities" of magic weapons (not "dice resulting from special abilities") are not multiplied. Again, page 114 PHB. But it is not "extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage," it is just bonus damage. Show to me that the +2 to bane IS "extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage," from page 140, or that it is extra dice damage from the glossary, and you will be right. The bane +2 is not an "extra" +2, it is an increase in the enhancement of the weapon. As an enhanement bonus, it is not "extra." Are you going to argue that a barbarian's Strength increase bonus does not apply to damage in a critical? Ranger damage is not *weapon* damage, anymore that sneak attack damage is, hence, it too would be barred from multiplication. But the rangers does not get "extra" damage, or extra dice, he gets a +2 bonus to damage. If your DM considers a magical addition to a weapon to be usual, Doesn't have to, the game itself does. more power to you. I don't consider an artifical additon to be 'normal'. And I certainly don't consider something that DOES result from a special ability to well, NOT result from a special ability. And you would be wrong. But more power to you. We're now reduced to semantic games and hair splitting, so I'll use Ockham's Razor and assume they mean what they say, rather than they mean what they don't say. No, you do not assume what they say, you add in your own concept that magic enhancements to damage is not "normal" damage, despite rampant contradictions to that claim throughout all the core books and no rules to back you up. I, and the majority of the gaming community will actually read what they say, and understand what they mean, without adding in our own unfounded opinions.
RaspK FOG 09-23-04, 03:52 PM	Critical: The entry in this column notes how the weapon is used with the rules for critical hits. When your character scores a critical hit, roll the damage two, three or four times, as indicated by its critical multiplier (using all applicable modifiers on each roll), and add all the results together. Exception: Extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage, such as that dealt by a sneak attack or the special ability of a flaming sword, is not multiplied when you score a critical hit. As you can see in the above text, you roll for damage as many times as the critical mutliplier indicates, "using all applicable modifiers on each roll". Furthermore, I see no reason why should they not include a reference to the enhancement bonus of the weapon (notice the bonus is an ENHANCEMENT bonus, meaning it ENHANCES the weapon's capability to deal damage) since they include a reference to the flaming ability. Again, note the fact that the flaming ability needs to be activated, while the bane ability is "use-activated" (always "on" as long as you use it).
Heron_Marked_Blade 09-23-04, 04:10 PM	The key portion of the section RaspK FOG quoted is where it states: "...(using all applicable modifiers on each roll)..." An enhancement bonus, like a STR bonus or the appropriate Weapon Specialization feat, is an applicable modifier. Therefore it is added to the weapon damage each time weapon damage is rolled. The +2d6 damage, however, is specifically listed as bonus damage dice. It is not an "applicable modifier," and therefore is not multiplied. It falls under the same category as sneak attack damage, or extra damage from the flaming burst ability. The +2 enhancement bonus from the bane ability, due to the nature of its being an enhancement bonus, is an "applicable modifier" (since enhancement bonuses are added to STR damage to modify the rolled damage), and therefore is multiplied on a critical hit. I think, tmagann, you're looking at this so closely that it's confusing you. Have you ever said a single word over and over again until it finally just becomes a sound and you lose the sense of meaning? This is a very similar situation: if you overanalyze a specific rule, it loses its meaning and just becomes a collection of individual words that are then subject to misinterpretation. The meaning is lost. There's my analogy for the day. :D
masterofmayhem 09-23-04, 04:11 PM	OK, I'm not sure how going by the PHB rather than the SRD makes me set in my ways. But it cuts both ways. if the PHB isn't good enough, maybe YOU are too set in your ways? That exact quote is also on page 221 of the DMG. Bane +2? It's a magical enemy type. Not 'usual', not for the weapon class, not everytime you use the weapon, just under *special* circumstances. Hardly 'usual' although some campaigns may make it seem so. More like ranger's enemy bonus But think of of it this way. A +1 dragon bane shortsword is always, not usually, a +3 shortsword with respect to dragons. It does not need to be affecting a dragon before it magically turns itself on. And again, I can't find a rule that actually says that, and no one is showing it to me. I find rules that say variable damage isn't doubled, and that usual damage is doubled, but nothing that says ALL constant damage is doubled, or even that 'usual' means 'constant' Quite the oposite, I've found reason that some constant damage ISN'T doubled (doubling the crit damage of a ranger enemy bonus on a crit?), and the word 'usual' being used, where 'constant'. The rule is on the same page that you referred us to to prove your point. From the 3.5 PHB: When your character scores a critical hit, roll the damage two, three or four times, as indicated by its critical multiplier (using all applicable modifiers on each roll), and add the results together. Exception: Extra damage over and above a weapon’s normal damage, such as that dealt by a sneak attack or the special ability of a flaming sword, is not multiplied when you score a critical hit. Hell, I was told I was too set in my ways for thinking damage dice was doubled, when I NEVER thought so. I apologize for that. It was not my intention to insult you in any way. And that's the point I'm making: The rules say ONLY 'usual' IS doubled. They say extra dice are NOT doubled, but nowhere do they say extra points ARE doubled. They do seem to be saying magic damage is NOT usual, though, nor is special ability damage (they use rogue exta as an example, but wouldn't ranger extra be just as unusual? Just weaker). The magical enhancement of a sword are quite normal. They are, in fact, "usually" on that sword. A Ranger "usually" gets his extra damage against a specified enemy, as well. And that's what I've been asking for: A reference that says what damage IS doubled, rather than what ISN'T. So far all I've found or been shown that shows what IS doubled is 'usual bonuses'. And the examples of what isn't seem to be clear: Anything unusual, magic and special abilities, have been excluded, a has anything not typical to an ordinary weapon and the wielder's strength. You'll find no such reference, just as you will find no such reference that explicitly states that you get size modifiers to your AC when flatfooted because the definition of flatfooted tells you what modifiers you lose. This is a similar situation. EDIT: Bah, RaspK FOG beat me too it. EDIT, the second: Whoa, Heron_Marked_Blade sneaked that one by me . . . . that was not there when i posted. He must be one of those Board Ninjas I've heard about. ;)
Dunbar 09-23-04, 04:18 PM	tmagann: Are you sure it doesn't say "extra damage dice" and not just "extra damage" isn't multiplied on a critical? From the SRD (don't have the 3.5 PHB): Multiplying Damage: Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results. Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied The bold is added by me. The clear implication here is that added dice of damage, from any source (elemental enchantment, sneak attack, bane, holy, etc.) is not multiplied, but everything else is. If the PHB does indeed say simply "extra damage" then tmagann has a case for his argument (unless this is clarified elsewhere in the 3.5 SRD). I'm too lazy to look in the FAQ, but it's probably clarified there as well. Don't get me wrong; tmagann has an (IMHO) incorrect interpretation, but I can at least see where he is coming from. If it simply says that "extra damage" (as opposed to "extra damage dice") is not multiplied on a critical, then we have to define what exactly "extra damage" means. Since AFAIK there is no exact definition of "extra damage" given, it is up to DM interpretation.
d_nychus 09-23-04, 04:23 PM	tmagann: Are you sure it doesn't say "extra damage dice" and not just "extra damage" isn't multiplied on a critical? From the SRD (don't have the 3.5 PHB): The bold is added by me. The clear implication here is that added dice of damage, from any source (elemental enchantment, sneak attack, bane, holy, etc.) is not multiplied, but everything else is. If the PHB does indeed say simply "extra damage" then tmagann has a case for his argument (unless this is clarified elsewhere in the 3.5 SRD). I'm too lazy to look in the FAQ, but it's probably clarified there as well. Don't get me wrong; tmagann has an (IMHO) incorrect interpretation, but I can at least see where he is coming from. If it simply says that "extra damage" (as opposed to "extra damage dice") is not multiplied on a critical, then we have to define what exactly "extra damage" means. Since AFAIK there is no exact definition of "extra damage" given, it is up to DM interpretation. It says only 'extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage' in two of the three locations in the PHB, and in the two locations, the examples they use are both extra dice of damage. Yes, they could have made it a little more clear, but the rules are still there.
tmagann 09-23-04, 04:24 PM	Or you could turn to the glossary and realize that that is poor way of reading the rule. But, you know, if you want to try to prove your point more than actually being right, go ahead. OK, I've read the glossary, I've ALSO read other things. Pages 114 and 140, for instance. How is itthat I read 3 entires an combine them, and I'm refusing to admit I'm wrog, and you read one entry and refusing to accept EXTRA information and definitions in a couple others,a dn you're right? It's not that I have a poor way of reading the rule (singular), it's that there is more than one, and I'm reading all I can find. [/QUOTE] Not that the listed examples of "extra damage" are all additional dice or anything important like that. That's right the two examples listed include extra dice. But that's not althey include: they include speical class only abilities, they includeALL special abilities of a particular enancement. So, how to determine which parts of the example are germaine? Read the rest of the entry, maybe? Like the part that uses the the word 'normal'? But it is not "extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage," it is just bonus damage. Show to me that the +2 to bane IS "extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage," from page 140, or that it is extra dice damage from the glossary, and you will be right. Then I guess you'll say I'm wrong, because to show that an ability from the DMG is above and beyond what's normal,I have to use the DMG, not the PHB. The Bane entry itself, in fact, says it and even uses the maic word you asked for 'normal': To wit: "Against its designated foe, it's effective enhancement bonus is +2 better than its NORMAL enhancement bonus" The emphasis is mine, and the reference isn't where you insisted I find it, but it's there, big as life and usingt he very word you wanted. The bane +2 is not an "extra" +2, it is an increase in the enhancement of the weapon. As an enhanement bonus, it is not "extra." Are you going to argue that a barbarian's Strength increase bonus does not apply to damage in a critical? Again, please read the DMG. It is an enhancement bonus above the norm for the weapon, and is listed as such But the rangers does not get "extra" damage, or extra dice, he gets a +2 bonus to damage. And that's not extra? This is getting silly. Do you want the dictionary definiton of 'extra' or of 'bonus' Because the ranger write says 'bonus' and the dictionary has 'extra in every definition of 'bonus' Like I said, hair splitting. It's not normal damage, it only applies to the designated foe. Sounds like a bane ability. See above Doesn't have to, the game itself does. [QUOTE=d_nychus] No, the game considers it an enhancment. You made that point yourself.an enhancement takes things beyond the norm. heck your dictionary if you like. I did. As you say, magic weapons are ENHANCED. That is not by any stretch 'normal'. Well, depending on campaign wealth, of course. And you would be wrong. But more power to you. Why? Because I not only own a dctionary, but use it? Seriously, you're saying 'artifical' = 'normal' and 'enhanced' = 'normal'. No, you do not assume what they say, you add in your own concept that magic enhancements to damage is not "normal" damage, despite rampant contradictions to that claim throughout all the core books and no rules to back you up. By no means. I took the time to read it, compare to 3.0 and note the changes they took the trouble to make, and to check the dictionary to make sure I wasn't altering the meanings of words. The ONLY assumption I made was that they were American English. I am, still, unable to find any shred of evidence in the books to a magical ENHANCEMENT with the definition of normal. in 30, yes, but,a s I aud, they took the time to change those entries, removing certain words and rephrasing, when they went to 3.5. I, and the majority of the gaming community will actually read what they say, and understand what they mean, without adding in our own unfounded opinions. You haven't yet. Truly. You didn't even read the definition of Bane before saying the +2 WAS normal. Which the write up CLEARLY says it is NOT. I'm sorry, but there it is.
tmagann 09-23-04, 04:41 PM	I think, tmagann, you're looking at this so closely that it's confusing you. Have you ever said a single word over and over again until it finally just becomes a sound and you lose the sense of meaning? This is a very similar situation: if you overanalyze a specific rule, it loses its meaning and just becomes a collection of individual words that are then subject to misinterpretation. The meaning is lost. There's my analogy for the day. :D Actually, I think I'm the only one that is NOT looking at it too closely. It's not a single word, it's two, actually, and they appear in more than one place (each). And I've looked at ALL the places I could find, 2 versions of the rules. I haven't gotten hung up on JUST the glossary, JUST the PHB, JUST the DMG. Hell, I haven't even restricted myself to 3.5. I've been told that nowhere does it say the +2 to bane isn't normal, when it clearly does and in the most obvious place: The DMG write up. And you know what? That is EXACTLY the issue that started all this, and NO ONE has read it yet, especially not the guy that told me it WAS normal damage. The fact of the matter is, it says it in a couple places. All the examples are of dice, but the words 'usual' and 'normal' keep appearing multiple places. At no time *IN 3.5* does it restrict itself to dice, and in at least one place it notes that the base +2 is NOT normal. And I'm standing too close because Im the only one that can see it? Or some of you are standing so close you can't see it? We know one person missed it already. Also, remember, the whole point of 3.5 was, in part, to clarify certain aspects of the rules. The fact that much of the rules were cut and pasted from 3.0, but that both entries in the PHB that actually said 'bonus dice only' were reworded and *no longer say that*, but rather now say 'normal' or 'usual' is also a telling point to me. Interpret how you want, but don't tell me I have my mind set, or that I'm standing too close to things simply because I don't change my view to match yours. It's as valid to say that your mind is set or you are too close because you haven't changed to my view. In point of fact, my view HAS changed. It's gotten a little narrower, in fact. Because of all this research and digging I did and the changes I noticed. Seems *MY* mind may have been open after all. It just had a different opinion.
d_nychus 09-23-04, 04:48 PM	OK, I've read the glossary, I've ALSO read other things. Pages 114 and 140, for instance. How is itthat I read 3 entires an combine them, and I'm refusing to admit I'm wrog, and you read one entry and refusing to accept EXTRA information and definitions in a couple others,a dn you're right? Well, I'm from Missouri, I'm used to stubborn people. It's not that I have a poor way of reading the rule (singular), it's that there is more than one, and I'm reading all I can find. How do you determine what is a single rule, and what are multiple rules anyways? That's just silly, and pointless. That's right the two examples listed include extra dice. But that's not althey include: they include speical class only abilities, they includeALL special abilities of a particular enancement. Where does it say all special class abilities are extra damage? The only one I see is the rogue sneak attack. All the other ones are bonuses TO damage. That is a huge difference in the game. So, how to determine which parts of the example are germaine? Read the rest of the entry, maybe? Like the part that uses the the word 'normal'? Yep, the normal damage for a +1 longsword is 1d8+1. That is what you use for the base for every hit with it. It is NOT 1d8 plus 1 point of extra damage, it is a straight 1d8+1. Then I guess you'll say I'm wrong, because to show that an ability from the DMG is above and beyond what's normal,I have to use the DMG, not the PHB. The Bane entry itself, in fact, says it and even uses the maic word you asked for 'normal': To wit: "Against its designated foe, it's effective enhancement bonus is +2 better than its NORMAL enhancement bonus" The emphasis is mine, and the reference isn't where you insisted I find it, but it's there, big as life and usingt he very word you wanted. Umm, magic in D&D is pretty normal for one thing. Just in case you didn't realize it. And you just showed my point again. The bane ability gives 2d6 points of EXTRA damage, in addition, the enhancement bonus to damage increase by 2. The enhancement bonus is a part of normal damage, so, yes, the +2 to damage is included in a critical hit. Again, please read the DMG. It is an enhancement bonus above the norm for the weapon, and is listed as such I have read the DMG, and an enhancement bonus to damage is NOT extra damage, it is a bonus to normal damage. Again, a huge difference. And that's not extra? This is getting silly. Do you want the dictionary definiton of 'extra' or of 'bonus' Because the ranger write says 'bonus' and the dictionary has 'extra in every definition of 'bonus' Who cares? I care about what it means in game terms, not in the dictionary. In game terms, a bonus to damage is not extra damage. Want to look up 'paladin' and mess up that class, too? Like I said, hair splitting. It's not normal damage, it only applies to the designated foe. Sounds like a bane ability. See above As you say, magic weapons are ENHANCED. That is not by any stretch 'normal'. Well, depending on campaign wealth, of course. In the core game, it IS normal. If you have something other than the core game, wouldn't that be ABnormal? Why? Because I not only own a dctionary, but use it? Seriously, you're saying 'artifical' = 'normal' and 'enhanced' = 'normal'. Again, who cares? A dictionary is not a reference for game rules. In D&D, a bonus to damage is a bonus to normal damage, which is what you multiply in every critical hit. A +5 longsword deals 1d8+5 points of damage on a normal hit. Hence, that is normal damage. By no means. I took the time to read it, compare to 3.0 and note the changes they took the trouble to make, and to check the dictionary to make sure I wasn't altering the meanings of words. Well, that failed. The ONLY assumption I made was that they were American English. Go, you. I am, still, unable to find any shred of evidence in the books to a magical ENHANCEMENT with the definition of normal. in 30, yes, but,a s I aud, they took the time to change those entries, removing certain words and rephrasing, when they went to 3.5. And you won't, because it is really a magical enhancement BONUS, and the BONUS is applied to normal damage. It is not, however, under any form of the definition of "extra damage over and above the weapons normal damage." You haven't yet. Truly. You didn't even read the definition of Bane before saying the +2 WAS normal. Which the write up CLEARLY says it is NOT. Yes I did. It is normal damage against the appropriate bane type, since it merely increases the bonus given to normal damage. However, the 2d6 IS listed as extra damage, so that does not apply to the critical I'm sorry, but there it is. Yep. I don't think I need to go on any further.
tmagann 09-23-04, 05:21 PM	One last futile attempt... Well, I'm from Missouri, I'm used to stubborn people. The sheer irony of that statement speaks for itself. Not that you'll listen How do you determine what is a single rule, and what are multiple rules anyways? That's just silly, and pointless. That was my point when you focused on one rule, the glossary. What I did was compare seevral rules int he same book, see what they all said, what they all didn't say, and looked for a contradiction. None of them contradicted each other, so i assumed they all applied. A sinlge rule doesn't cover it if they've taken the time to address it multiple times in multiple ways. *I* looked at all of them Where does it say all special class abilities are extra damage? The only one I see is the rogue sneak attack. All the other ones are bonuses TO damage. That is a huge difference in the game. Stubboned. I the definition of 'bonus' in the dictionary. Look it up. Second request Yep, the normal damage for a +1 longsword is 1d8+1. That is what you use for the base for every hit with it. It is NOT 1d8 plus 1 point of extra damage, it is a straight 1d8+1. Stubborn, AND games-with-semantics No, the normal damage for a longsword is 1d8. A +1 longsword isn't normal. It's been enhanced magically. Look up enhanced Second request Umm, magic in D&D is pretty normal for one thing. Just in case you didn't realize it. That depends on the campaign, now, deosn't it? One of mine si, two aren't, one is ont he fence. But, again, you're defining an enhancement as normal when that's not how the language works.. And you just showed my point again. The bane ability gives 2d6 points of EXTRA damage, in addition, the enhancement bonus to damage increase by 2. The enhancement bonus is a part of normal damage, so, yes, the +2 to damage is included in a critical hit. REALLY stubborn. What I showed you was that it was NOT normal. The Bane write up says that it is NOT normal, but BETTER than normal. This is the very thing I've been accused of by other, yourself included: Too close to the issue, a locked mindset, and stubborn. You yourself, asked for the reference and now aren't even reading it. I have read the DMG, and an enhancement bonus to damage is NOT extra damage, it is a bonus to normal damage. Again, a huge difference. Again, PLEASE look up 'bonus' in the dictionary. No difference at all IF you actually double check what the word means Who cares? I care about what it means in game terms, not in the dictionary. In game terms, a bonus to damage is not extra damage. And there it is: I'm not wrong because I checked all my facts, even to double checkingt he meanings of ord, I'm wrong because you dont' want the words to mean anything that might disagree with you stance. The fact that you dont' care what the wrods actually mean, and are defining 'game terms' to suit yourself says it all. And again, the word STUBBORN comes to mind. It was YOUR word, wasn't it? Want to look up 'paladin' and mess up that class, too? I have no earthly idea what you mean by this. It makes no sense at all. In the core game, it IS normal. If you have something other than the core game, wouldn't that be ABnormal? No, in YOUR game it is normal. Youa re interpreting the core rules to suit yourself and even admit that you dont' care what the words actually mean, that you'll use your own 'game' definitions Again, who cares? A dictionary is not a reference for game rules. In D&D, a bonus to damage is a bonus to normal damage, which is what you multiply in every critical hit. A +5 longsword deals 1d8+5 points of damage on a normal hit. Hence, that is normal damage. No, it is a reference for the meaning of words, such as the words used in those rules. You said that 'bonus' did not mean 'extra' I said it did, and offered to back up my stance with an actual reference froma books designed to comment on the actual meaning of words. But that's not what you want it to mean, so it doesn't? And you dont' consider that rather stubborn? And even a bit, well, silly? Well, that failed. Go, you. God, you're actually TRYING to make this into some sort of flame thing, aren't you? And you won't, because it is really a magical enhancement BONUS, and the BONUS is applied to normal damage. It is not, however, under any form of the definition of "extra damage over and above the weapons normal damage." Please, PLEASE, use a dictionary Yes I did. It is normal damage against the appropriate bane type, since it merely increases the bonus given to normal damage. However, the 2d6 IS listed as extra damage, so that does not apply to the critical Normal damage aganst the appropriate bae type? Well, that's A) reaching, badly (special ability damage is normal. Under the right circumstances? the pity is, I think you might be serious), and B) Its tates int he write up that it is NOT normal damage. if it's only normal under speical circumstances, it's not normal, truly. Yep. I don't think I need to go on any further. No, you've made your point. You won't let the facts confuse you. You truly won't. You're not even reading the references you ask for and have been reduced to playing semantic games that are rather forced in some cases. Reminds me of that razorbladesmile guy.
Heron_Marked_Blade 09-23-04, 05:27 PM	Reminds me of that razorbladesmile guy.Uh oh, now you've done it. *dons his +1 heavy fortification leather armor of greater fire resistance and takes cover*
masterofmayhem 09-23-04, 05:48 PM	The ONLY assumption I made was that they were American English. Yeah, the english language sure is fun, isn't it? :D I have no earthly idea what you mean by this. It makes no sense at all. He means that the definitions of D&D terms often differ from those words' real definitions. In this particular example, he refers to the difference between the literal meaning if the word "paladin" and the D&D class of the same name (but not necessarily same definition).
RaspK FOG 09-23-04, 06:07 PM	I will make one last try to show you your perspective has gotten off track somewhere along the conversation; you make a reference from the DMG's entry for the bane special property, pointing out that the weapon is treated as if having an enhancement bonus of +2 above its normal. There you have it: the use of "normal" there refers to the value by which the weapon is thus enhanced; that is, it refers to its normal enhancement bonus, since the weapon has a greater enhancement against opponents it is a bane to. It has nothing to do with it being normal damage for the weapon or not. Let's say we were discussing 2e weapons; back then, weapons dealt different damages depending on whether the target was Medium, or smaller, or Large, or bigger. Under a similar wording, the text could say that this (or that) weapon deals more (or less) damage than its normal against Large monsters.
Zherog 09-23-04, 06:12 PM	Tmagann - read this article (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/keenimprovedcritstacking.html) from Sean K. Reynolds' website. As one of the designers of 3.x I have to assume Sean knows what he's talking about. And while the article is describing why keen and Improved Critical should stack, when you look at his numbers for things such as a +2 rapier, you can see that he's multiplying the +2 on a critical hit. That's a start, anyway.
Dunbar 09-23-04, 06:57 PM	tmagann: Um, let's get back to the definition from the PHB: Critical hit damage is usually double damage, which means rolling damage twice, just as if the attacker had actually hit the defender two times. (Any extra damage dice, such as from a rogue's sneak attack, are not rolled multiple times, but are added to the total at the end of the calculation.) So what does this tell us? Let's break it down. 1. Critical hit damage is usually double damage. Ok, clearly they say usually because this is true of most weapons and natural attacks. With certain weapons and/or magic or class abilities, you might be rolling x3 or x4 or more damage. Clear enough? Ok, on to the next part: 2. which means rolling damage twice, just as if the attacker had actually hit the defender 2 times. Aha. So, it seems that all added damage gets rolled twice, right? Bonus damage from str, from magical enchantements on the weapon, from favored enemy bonuses, even from sneak attack or a flaming weapon. But wait...there's more... 3. Any extra damage dice, such as from a rogue's sneak attack, are not rolled multiple times, but are added to the total at the end of the calculation. Aha. So sneak attack damage and added dice from a flaming weapon or from a bane enchantment do not get multiplied. But, everything else is fair game. That definition is from the PHB glossary. This definition is from the SRD: Multiplying Damage: Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results. Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied. Again, clearly all damage that is not added dice of damage is multiplied. Finally, there is this, also from the SRD: Critical Hits: When you make an attack roll and get a natural 20 (the d20 shows 20), you hit regardless of your target’s Armor Class, and you have scored a threat...A critical hit means that you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together. Unless otherwise specified, the threat range for a critical hit on an attack roll is 20, and the multiplier is x2. Exception: Extra damage over and above a weapon’s normal damage is not multiplied when you score a critical hit. Aha, look at that. Here is your PHB definition of critical hits, and it even mentions "all your usual bonuses." Clearly, the first entry, under multiplying damage, clarifies the ambiguity in this definition. Nowhere is "usual bonuses" or "extra damage" defined in the definition of critical hits; it's poorly worded. However, the method given for multiplying damage is clear. I guess I can't make the case better than that. Final note: using dictionary definitions for DnD terms is a bad idea. DnD has it's own lexicon, with words often having meaning that differ, or are more exacting, than definitions you will find in a dictionary. For example, look up flanking in a dictionary and compare it to the definition of flanking in DnD terms.
tmagann 09-23-04, 07:26 PM	OK, let's see I've got this right: 1) Because the game goes to great length to redefine 'paladin' I should assume they meant to redefine other things, even though they made no actual effort to? I'm sorry, but they published a mass market english language book, I'm going to assume they are actually using english unless THEY redefine their terms in their book. Yes, the D&D paladin isn't a San Francisco playboy that wears black on the weekends and shoots a sixgun. I kind of got that after a couple of pages of redefinition. Note: pages of redefnition. 2) Now, Because a definition uses the word 'normal enhancement bonus' I'm to assume that makes the enhancement bonus part of normal damage? It doesn't. Try this: If it works in an antimagic field, it's normal: The evidence? It's still working. If it doesn't, it's OBVIOOUSLY not normal, or the LACK OF MAGIC wouldn't affect it. The normal ENHANCEMENT is NOT the normal DAMAGE, as it's not always there. What it IS is tha base enhancement necessary to hold other sorts of enhancements, the enhancement that always works WHEN MAGIC WORKS. Just like bane always works against a specific foe, and flamin always works when it's activated. eacha nd every one of these, from the basic + on up has a special condition. The normal damage works when ALL special conditions are removed..... Normal damage, on the other hand, ALWAYS works, magic or not. Sure, it adds to the notmal enhancement. But this is the only place they use normal enhancement (and all magical weapons with specials MUST have an enhancement). The other place says normal damage, and that place excludes a special ability. (remember? the +2 is part of the special ability, and only works under very specific conditions, more limiting the the other enhancements, and the definition we're using DOES say that the +2 IS NOT normal? Even for the enhancement....). 3) Next I'm refered to an article about critical damage written by someone considered an authority, and then told it does NOT agree with the core books, but rather, apparently, states what the man thinks the core rules should be changed. Sorry, I'm not going down that road. You've started out by telling me it's a flawed article and that the premise is to change the way criticals work in the books. All it says is that he's got a couple house rules, and you agree with them. 4) Because SOME gamers have set their own definitons, I'm to assume that the publishers are using those terms also, even if they haven't takent he time to put the redefinitions in the glossary. And they DID include a glossary... I'm done being insulted because I don't follow the herd (consider the lemming), because I own a dictionary and I'm willng to use it, or because I don't take an article that I'm *told* is an explanation for a house rule as official. Heck, a post just appeared (as I write this) in which someone read each and every part of the definition except the last line. The one where is says only NORMAL damage is multiplied. He also ignored one other thing: All YOUR usual bonuses. Not all IT'S usual bouses. That's a case for strength, and weapons specialization, but not magic. YOU aren't magic, the weapon is. YOUR bonuses depend on YOU, not the weapon.
Zherog 09-23-04, 08:45 PM	removed because I was in a bad mood when I posted it....
Zherog 09-23-04, 09:04 PM	tmagann, I've just done something I have never resorted to in my 3+ years on these boards. I have e-mailed customer service. I hope you'll find their answer to be satisfactory. Once I receive a reply, I will post it in whole. In the meantime, though, here is the exact e-mail I sent: Good evening. I was hoping you could settle a debate between myself and a friend regarding how a critical hit works in D&D. Could you tell me if the following things are multiplied upon scoring a successful critical hit: -- any strength bonus the character has? -- Any enhancement bonus on the weapon? -- Any bonus to damage from Power Attack? -- Favored enemy bonus damage? -- The enhancement bonus gained from the "bane" weapon ability? Putting the questions above another way: Is it correct that *anything* that adds a flat plus to a damage roll is multiplied on a critical? Thank you in advance for your answers. John Yeah, that's right. I e-mailed Customer Service. I can't believe it, either. :bored:
tmagann 09-23-04, 09:11 PM	:bored: Did you even bother to actually read what I wrote? Or, assuming you didn't (since I never said those things) did you look at the article? Did you look at the frickin' MATH within the article where Mr. Reynolds multiplies the magic enhancement on a critical. Really, you're getting utterly ridiculous at this point. This is a mistake, but one last time... Yes. Did you? It's on his private site (as opposed to WotC), it starts with the word "rant", and it describes the circumstances in a game that was run by Monte Cook, someone who has, as I recall, not only extensively rewitten many rules, but published them through a different publisher. But I didn't stop there, I then checked his tables, which only dealt with strength bonuses, even though you can't have a keen enhancement without a magic enhancement. The magic enhancement was missing entirely for the math he did INDEPENDANT of the specific game he was refering to. The ONLY bonuses he actually ran on the tables was the character's personal bonus, even though a magical bonus was REQUIRED for his conditions Seems he doesn't think the enhancement should add either, although, apparently, Monte Cook DOES. Now, I'm sure I'll be told I've somehow misread this, too.
Zherog 09-23-04, 09:14 PM	Indeed you have misread it. In the text, he multiplies the enhancement bonus. After all, the errata clearly says to give precident to the text over the tables. :P Hopefully, you'll accept customer service's answer, and not wheedle out of it.
tmagann 09-23-04, 09:28 PM	Indeed you have misread it. In the text, he multiplies the enhancement bonus. After all, the errata clearly says to give precident to the text over the tables. :P Hopefully, you'll accept customer service's answer, and not wheedle out of it. yes, in the text describing a particular game he does, indeed, multiply it. I acknowledged that. I then pointed to the CHART, which was done independant of the game and in which he does NOT multiply or even consider magical bonuses, even though they are required for his conditions. You tell me I'm going to wheedle when that is EXACTLY what you are doing now. I pointed to where your own refence did NOT multiply it, and you totally ignored the existance of the chart.... My god, he even SAYS the charts are part of an update. What I dont' see is anything saying the charts are secondary, or take a abcak seat, or that there is ANOTHER errata after the update that introduced the charts. you keep posting and saying how bored youa re and posting someo more. I somehow thing you won't be posting anything from customer service that says you might be wrong. You're already wheelding out of your own referents. Now I need to figure out how to unsud from a thread. Yeesh.
Zherog 09-23-04, 09:36 PM	I guarantee you I will post whatever reply I receive from Customer Service. because, unlike you, I am able to admit when I am wrong.
Dunbar 09-23-04, 10:05 PM	Heck, a post just appeared (as I write this) in which someone read each and every part of the definition except the last line. The one where is says only NORMAL damage is multiplied. He also ignored one other thing: All YOUR usual bonuses. Not all IT'S usual bouses. That's a case for strength, and weapons specialization, but not magic. YOU aren't magic, the weapon is. YOUR bonuses depend on YOU, not the weapon. Good god. Read the ENTIRE last line. You just read "normal damage" and go off with some self-proclaimed definition of what is normal damage. That last line reads: Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied. Extra damage dice are never multiplied. Not simple extra damage over some vauge "normal damage," but extra damage dice. Secondly, it does say all your usual bonuses. So I guess if I am to take your interpretation of what that means as gospel, then on a critical hit you apply str, specialization, and whatever else you think means YOUR bonuses 2x (or 3x or whatever), but you never get the weapon's own bonuses at all. Note that it says: A critical hit means that you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together. It never says to add the weapon's bonuses at all. So I guess on a crit those just don't count. :rolleyes: You are inventing definitions. You are deciding what YOU think are "normal" bonuses or "usual" bonuses. Find for me a single passage in the PHB that defines what these terms mean and you may have a point. Let me clarify before you rant at me again: what I mean is you are deciding what is and is not normal or usual or YOUR damage in DnD terms. Frankly, when it says "your usual bonses" I take that to mean you add all the bonuses you would usually add...str, specialization, enhancement, favored enemy, etc. etc. My interpretation is just as valid as yours without an explicit definition of the term in the PHB. Finally, let's take a second look at the definition for the way you multiply damage: Multiplying Damage: Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results. Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied. Please, please tell me what is unclear about this. This is clearly a clarification of how critical hits work. I explained this in my previous post, but you conveniently ignored it, presumably because it runs directly counter to your position.
Zherog 09-23-04, 10:16 PM	For everybody involved in this discussion, two things: 1) I apologize to anybody offended by my earlier snippiness. I had a bad commute home. 2) Was my wording of the e-mail sent to Customer Service satisfactory?
Heron_Marked_Blade 09-24-04, 12:04 AM	1) I apologize to anybody offended by my earlier snippiness. I had a bad commute home.Not a problem! I've had days like that as well. Sometimes ya gotta vent. 2) Was my wording of the e-mail sent to Customer Service satisfactory?Sounded good. That should get us an answer (although people will invariably bring up the "But CS is notoriously wrong! What about such-and-such situation when they said such-and-such!!" argument as grounds for dismissing the answer.... :rolleyes: ). Tmagann, I'm going to have to ask this (I think I or someone made reference to it in the middle of this thread): What do you make of the bolded word ("dice") in the following quote, and how does that NOT clear up the confusion? Multiplying Damage: Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results. Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied.
Naeron 09-24-04, 10:49 AM	And that's the point I'm making: The rules say ONLY 'usual' IS doubled. They say extra dice are NOT doubled, but nowhere do they say extra points ARE doubled. They do seem to be saying magic damage is NOT usual, though, nor is special ability damage (they use rogue exta as an example, but wouldn't ranger extra be just as unusual? Just weaker). And here lies your misunderstanding. The text does not say that the doubling if of the usual damage. It says that usually the damage is doubled "Exactly" as if you had hit them twice but the qualifies this to say that extra damage dice are not doubled. This is because the majority of critical multipliers are *2 (in factthe default is 20/*2 unless otherwise stated). However some weapons have a *3 critical multipler (longspear) and some special situations also change the multipler (charging with a lance). But the usual situation is that criticals do double damage. If your DM considers a magical addition to a weapon to be usual, more power to you. I don't consider an artifical additon to be 'normal'. And I certainly don't consider something that DOES result from a special ability to well, NOT result from a special ability. Again you are failing to comprehend that the normal damage of a STR 14 PC wielding a +2 longsword in 1 one hand is 1d8+4. They say "the weapon" rather than "the base weapon type" and a +2 longsword IS a weapon and its normal damage is 1d8+2. The normal damage of a longsword may be 1d8 but this PC is not hitting them with a longsword, they are using a +2 longsword, in the same way if you had some manufacturing technique that increased a weapon's damage dice (e.g. a Heavy Longsword that did 1d10 damage) then that 1D10 is again the normal damage for a Heavy Longsword and is what would used in a critical.
Zherog 09-24-04, 11:19 AM	Thanks, Naeron. I think you've stated it the best out of all of us so far. A very good description (in my opinion, anyway). :tiphat:
d_nychus 09-24-04, 03:33 PM	I guarantee you I will post whatever reply I receive from Customer Service. because, unlike you, I am able to admit when I am wrong. Zherog, while I appreciate the help, I should point out that this is an exercise in futility. tmagann will not accept any evidence that does not support his view, and even goes outside primary sources just to add on to his claims. Even if the CS reply says "yes, this is all multiplied in a hit," and is signed Skip Williams, Andy Collins, Bruce Cordel, Jonathan Tweet, Bill Slavicsek, Mike Donias, David Noonan, and everyone else in WotC R&D, I doubt he will change his mind. I've proven my point, and wasted enough time doing it. Good luck in convincing him of the actual rules, though. You'll need it.
d_nychus 09-24-04, 03:44 PM	Not a problem! I've had days like that as well. Sometimes ya gotta vent. Sounded good. That should get us an answer (although people will invariably bring up the "But CS is notoriously wrong! What about such-and-such situation when they said such-and-such!!" argument as grounds for dismissing the answer.... :rolleyes: ). That is what I am expecting. Tmagann, I'm going to have to ask this (I think I or someone made reference to it in the middle of this thread): What do you make of the bolded word ("dice") in the following quote, and how does that NOT clear up the confusion? The problem is that the 3.5 PHB does NOT have the word "dice" in two of the three locations where it has that phrase. However, in all cases, the PHB lists examples that are additional dice of damage, like sneak attack and the flaming ability. Personally, I think the 3.5 staff were clearing the way for extra damage types that were not additional dice for the future. What this means in the argument is that if a damage is listed as extra, then it is not multiplied in a critical hit, regardless of whether this is additional dice or not. However, there is a clear and obviously game term difference between extra damage, and bonuses to normal damage, which is what enhancement bonuses give. tmagann has decided to go outside of game terms in order to redefine bonus as meaning the same thing as extra in the game, which is obviously not the case. I expect his next argument to be Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting to be the same thing, because the thesaurus lists "greater" and "improved" as being synonyms.
Zherog 09-24-04, 04:56 PM	The following is the complete reply I received from Customer Service: -- any strength bonus the character has? -- Any enhancement bonus on the weapon? -- Any bonus to damage from Power Attack? -- Favored enemy bonus damage? -- The enhancement bonus gained from the "bane" weapon ability? The rules on page 140 of the Player's Handbook states the following "Exception: Extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage, such as that dealt by sneak attack or the special ability of a flaming sword, is not multiplied when you score a critical hit. The only things in the list above that you do not get on a critical hit are the favored enemy bonus damage and the bonus from the bane ability. Thanks! *Please quote this e-mail in any reply.* Darrin Wizards of the Coast Customer Service Department Wizards of the Coast 1-800-324-6496 Darrin missed the closing quotation mark when he quoted page 140. It should appear after the phrase "critical hit." The following is my reply to Darrin: Darrin - Thank you kindly for your response. I'd like to ask one follow-up question. Could you please explain why the damage from a Ranger's Favored Enemy or the Bane ability are not multiplied on a critical? Thanks kindly, and have a nice weekend! John I will, once again, post the complete reply once I receive it.
Zherog 09-24-04, 08:00 PM	Darrin's reply to my follow-up question: They are both considered extra damage. The ranger's favored enemy damage is similar in nature to extra sneak attack damage and the bane ability is the result of a weapon's special ability. *Please quote this e-mail in any reply.* Darrin Wizards of the Coast Customer Service Department Wizards of the Coast 1-800-324-6496
masterofmayhem 09-24-04, 08:23 PM	Tmagann, I'm going to have to ask this (I think I or someone made reference to it in the middle of this thread): What do you make of the bolded word ("dice") in the following quote, and how does that NOT clear up the confusion? Multiplying Damage: Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results. Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied. He said earlier that he would not accept the SRD as more official than the PHB. Why, I don't know, because the SRD can be updated (while someone's PHB cannot).
RaspK FOG 09-25-04, 03:47 AM	Well, I think we should give the man proper credit, at least: we were the ones at fault.
d_nychus 09-25-04, 05:45 AM	No, because Customer Service is clearly wrong. Not the first time.
billboyjones 09-25-04, 09:23 AM	Okay, from reading this thread over, I think I got this down, but I'd like to throw an example out with as much crazyness piled onto it as I can, to see if I've got all of the rulings down (3.5 rules). My crazy example: A 5th level ranger character, attacking hobgoblins. He has favored enemy +4 versus the hobgoblins, and a +1 shortsword, that has flaming (+1d6 fire damage), and goblinoid bane on it (+2 enhancement bonus, +2d6 damage). He is also currently being helped by a Prayer spell. Initial roll: [1d20] + [STR] + 1 [enhancement] + 2 [bane enhancement] + 1 [Prayer spell] Damage roll: [1d6] + [STR] + 1 [enhancement] + 2 [bane enhancement] + 4 [favored enemy] + [1d6; flaming] + [2d6; extra bane damage] + 1 [Prayer spell] Critical roll: (([1d6] + [STR] + 1 [enhancement]) * 2) + 2 [bane enhancement] + 4 [favored enemy] + [1d6; flaming] + [2d6; extra bane damage] + 1 [Prayer spell] Is this correct??
Zherog 09-25-04, 11:00 AM	Critical roll: (([1d6] + [STR] + 1 [enhancement]) * 2) + 2 [bane enhancement] + 4 [favored enemy] + [1d6; flaming] + [2d6; extra bane damage] + 1 [Prayer spell] Is this correct?? Not quite. You actually roll twice for the critical, not multiply by 2. Also, I would multiply the prayer effect. So, going on the assumption Customer Service is correct, and that prayer gets multiplied, you would have: 2d6 (weapon) + (STR*2) + 2 (enhancement doubled) + 2 (Prayer doubled) + 2 (bane enhancement) + 4 (favored enemy) + 1d6 (flaming) + 2d6 (extra bane damage).
Zherog 09-25-04, 11:02 AM	No, because Customer Service is clearly wrong. Not the first time. Someone else could e-mail CustServ and hope to get another person. Alternatively, somebody could e-mail the Sage and see if they get an answer back.
d_nychus 09-25-04, 12:24 PM	Okay, from reading this thread over, I think I got this down, but I'd like to throw an example out with as much crazyness piled onto it as I can, to see if I've got all of the rulings down (3.5 rules). My crazy example: A 5th level ranger character, attacking hobgoblins. He has favored enemy +4 versus the hobgoblins, and a +1 shortsword, that has flaming (+1d6 fire damage), and goblinoid bane on it (+2 enhancement bonus, +2d6 damage). He is also currently being helped by a Prayer spell. Initial roll: [1d20] + [STR] + 1 [enhancement] + 2 [bane enhancement] + 1 [Prayer spell] And + 4 [favored enemy] Damage roll: [1d6] + [STR] + 1 [enhancement] + 2 [bane enhancement] + 4 [favored enemy] + [1d6; flaming] + [2d6; extra bane damage] + 1 [Prayer spell] Yup. It would be 1d6+([STR] +8) +1d6 fire +2d6 Critical roll: (([1d6] + [STR] + 1 [enhancement]) * 2) + 2 [bane enhancement] + 4 [favored enemy] + [1d6; flaming] + [2d6; extra bane damage] + 1 [Prayer spell] Is this correct?? No, it should be 1d6+([STR] +8) + 1d6+([STR] +8) +1d6 fire +2d6
d_nychus 09-25-04, 12:36 PM	Here is what I asked the Sage. 3.5 changed the exception to what is multiplied in critical hits from any extra damage dice to merely extra damage. What exactly qualifies as extra damage in 3.5? Sneak attack damage and damage from the energy enhancements to weapons (i.e., flaming) are listed as extra damage. Is a ranger's damage bonus from the favored enemy ability 'extra damage?' The bane ability gives a +2 enhancement and an extra 2d6 damage against a certain type of foe; I am certain that the 2d6 is extra damage, but what about the +2 enhancement bonus? Would that be multiplied in a critical hit? Thank you. Orion Let's see what an actual game designer has to say.
masterofmayhem 09-25-04, 12:43 PM	Not a problem! I've had days like that as well. Sometimes ya gotta vent. Sounded good. That should get us an answer (although people will invariably bring up the "But CS is notoriously wrong! What about such-and-such situation when they said such-and-such!!" argument as grounds for dismissing the answer.... ). That is what I am expecting. Well, I think we should give the man proper credit, at least: we were the ones at fault. No, because Customer Service is clearly wrong. Not the first time. Hmmmm . . . .
Zherog 09-25-04, 01:05 PM	Here is what I asked the Sage. Let's see what an actual game designer has to say. It'll be a fun discussion when Andy contradicts what Customer Service said... ;)
billboyjones 09-25-04, 02:28 PM	And + 4 [favored enemy] Has favored enemy been altered to include attack rolls? In the SRD 3.5 I mean. I looked at my PHB 3.5 and the favored enemy section didn't say attack rolls, only the various checks and damage rolls. Have attack rolls been added to the SRD 3.5 favored enemy? Sweet! Not quite. You actually roll twice for the critical, not multiply by 2. Also, I would multiply the prayer effect. No, it should be 1d6+([STR] +8) + 1d6+([STR] +8) +1d6 fire +2d6 Ah! I see what you guys are saying. My mistake. It'll be a fun discussion when Andy contradicts what Customer Service said... ;) :rofl: - I hate this game sometimes.
d_nychus 09-25-04, 02:47 PM	Hmmmm . . . . Well, I didn't expect to see CS get THAT basic of a question wrong. I mean, they get things worng often, but this is like asking what is 5 and 5 and them telling us 9. Has favored enemy been altered to include attack rolls? In the SRD 3.5 I mean. I looked at my PHB 3.5 and the favored enemy section didn't say attack rolls, only the various checks and damage rolls. Have attack rolls been added to the SRD 3.5 favored enemy? Sweet! No, that was my mistake. I thought that was a damage roll you were listing there, not an attack roll, because I was not paying close enough attention. My mistake.
billboyjones 09-25-04, 03:01 PM	Aw..I was so hoping that favored enemy had been added to attack rolls. I mean, really, I would think it more logical that it be added to attack rolls instead of damage, you know. A better chance of hitting the creature type you've studied makes more real world sense to me than extra damage. Still, I like it being added to damage rolls too. I guess I'm just greedy for bonuses. lol
RaspK FOG 09-26-04, 08:10 AM	Well, asking the Sage might be a better idea; my question is, why did not one do it sooner, if one had the proper email address? :mad:
billboyjones 09-27-04, 08:46 AM	Just because I'm curious now, I went ahead and Emailed the customer service folks asking basically the same question as before, but with my patented n00bie approach. Here is my Email: Hi, sorry to post in with what I think might be an easy question, but I've spent time building up my character's weapon, and it's getting kinda crazy. At this point in time, I'm having trouble deciphering what stuff does get done multiple times on a crit, and what doesn't. My character is a ranger, so obviously he has favored enemy. Does the favored enemy bonus to damage get factored into the xA when you get a crit. Secondly, I have the "bane" magical ability. It says that it makes the weapons normal enhancement bonus +2 better than normal. Additionally, it adds +2d6 damage. Now I know that the 2d6 damage isn't factored into the crit multiplying because the DMG states that extra damage dice aren't multiplied. That works good for both "bane" and the "flaming" ability. What about the added +2 to the weapons normal enhancement bonus. I know that the enhancement bonus get factored into the crit, but I don't want to factor in that additional +2 unless I'm supposed to. So does the +2 weapon enhancement due to "bane" factor into the multiplying of the crit or not? and how come? Lastly, what about spells. If my character is being affected by a "Prayer" spell, does the +1 to damage also get factored into the multiplying? Thanks.
d_nychus 09-27-04, 08:48 AM	Well, asking the Sage might be a better idea; my question is, why did not one do it sooner, if one had the proper email address? :mad: Well, with CS, you usually get a quick response. With the Sage, it might be a day or two, or might not make an appearance until next month's Dragon. The Sage is a full blown game designer; he's got much more pressing concerns than to rectify one small rules argument.
billboyjones 09-30-04, 07:39 AM	Hi. Heard back from customer service, so I figured I'd post the response here so we can all have a look see. Anyway, here's the Email I got back. Game rules question - Dungeons & Dragons/Forgotten Realms Feedback From: billboyjones (billboyjones@yahoo.com) Hi, sorry to post in with what I think might be an easy question, but Ive spent time building up my characters weapon, and its getting kinda crazy. At this point in time, Im having trouble deciphering what stuff does get done multiple times on a crit, and what doesnt. My character is a ranger, so obviously he has favored enemy. Does the favored enemy bonus to damage get factored into the xA when you get a crit. -Yes, it sure does. Secondly, I have the bane magical ability. It says that it makes the weapons normal enhancement bonus 2 better than normal. Additionally, it adds 2d6 damage. Now I know that the 2d6 damage isnt factored into the crit multiplying because the DMG states that extra damage dice arent multiplied. That works good for both bane and the flaming ability. What about the added 2 to the weapons normal enhancement bonus. I know that the enhancement bonus get factored into the crit, but I dont want to factor in that additional 2 unless Im supposed to. So does the 2 weapon enhancement due to bane factor into the multiplying of the crit or not? and how come? -Yes, it does. It is treated the same as any other enhancement bonus. Lastly, what about spells. If my character is being affected by a Prayer spell, does the 1 to damage also get factored into the multiplying? -Yes. Good Gaming! *Please quote this email in any reply.* **************************************** *** Chris Customer Service Department Wizards of the Coast 1-800-324-6496 **************************************** *** Now, compare that with what Darrin from customer service said (quoted from page 2 of this discussion) -- any strength bonus the character has? -- Any enhancement bonus on the weapon? -- Any bonus to damage from Power Attack? -- Favored enemy bonus damage? -- The enhancement bonus gained from the "bane" weapon ability? The rules on page 140 of the Player's Handbook states the following "Exception: Extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage, such as that dealt by sneak attack or the special ability of a flaming sword, is not multiplied when you score a critical hit. The only things in the list above that you do not get on a critical hit are the favored enemy bonus damage and the bonus from the bane ability. Thanks! *Please quote this e-mail in any reply.* Darrin Wizards of the Coast Customer Service Department Wizards of the Coast 1-800-324-6496 ...and I believe we have something of a contradiction going on.
Zherog 09-30-04, 10:06 PM	This isn't the first time I've seen different answers coming from different folks at customer service. This also isn't the first time I've seen Darrin provide what I think is a dubious answer.
billboyjones 10-01-04, 07:00 AM	So we're going with Chris from customer service then?
Zherog 10-01-04, 08:00 AM	Well, Chris agrees with my original stance, so yeah - I like Chris's answer much better. To the best of my knowledge, Darrin gave an incorrect answer and Chris gave the correct answer. You may, of course, choose whichever answer you think is best - based upon arguments in this thread, answers from Customer Service, etc.
sparkster4242 10-01-04, 10:11 AM	the Bane ability does not add an 'extra' or 'bonus' enhancement bonus to the weapon - it makes the existing bonus bigger. that larger enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls behaves exactly like any other enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls. the word 'normal' is used so often, in so many different ways, that its actual meaning is wholly dependent on its context. In most instances, it means 'the way it would be without this particular effect'. for instance, the 'normal enhancement bonus' as used in the description of the Bane ability would be the enhancement bonus without the effects of the Bane ability. offhand, i cant think of any passages in which the word 'normal' is synonomous with 'non-magical'. if such passages exist, i would be willing to bet they involve rendering non-magical objects magical, or magical objects non-magical - neither case is relevant to the Bane ability. sneak attack damage, bane damage, flaming damage, all are expressed as dice, and therefore are not multiplied in a critical hit. PHB 3.5, p. 134: Multiplying Damage: Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results. Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage (see Multiplying, page 304). Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon's normal damage, such as that dealt by a sneak attack or the special ability of a flaming sword, are never multiplied. note the bold italicized portion - note also that the only exception is 'extra damage dice'. a weapon's enhancement bonus modifies damage, and is not dice, therefore it is multiplied in a crit. if we assume that 'normal' means 'whatever it would be without this effect', then 'weapon's normal damage' would be read as 'the damage the weapon would deal without extra damage dice' - which would include an enhancement bonus to damage rolls, but would exclude the 2d6 provided by the Bane ability. on a side note, according to this rule a ranger's favored enemy damage _is_ multiplied on a crit, because it is a damage modifier that is not extra dice of damage.