Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Remedyx 08-22-07, 03:03 AM	Just wondering if Im correct in my thinking here. Flay Foe from Champions of Ruins has a misprint between the chart and the description. The chart says that the damage is 1d6 and the description says its 1 point. Now as far as I know the rule is the description is the rule to follow. However in this case Im pretty sure that the chart is correct. The reason for this is that the feat Pulverize Foe from the same book, which works the same way except it requires a bludgeoning weapon as opposed to slashing, says 1d6 in both the text and the chart. So I assume...as much as I hate to...that the damage is 1d6. So if anyone knows for sure please drop me a line. Thanks.
tarkin 08-22-07, 10:53 AM	Does it say "an extra 1 point" or does it say "an extra point" If it says "1 point" or better yet "1 points" I would assume it meant to be 1d6. If it said an extra point than that looks more like something done intentionally. I have not seen errata for Champions of Ruin.
Kouk 08-22-07, 11:08 AM	There was no errata, but based on the fact that the nearly identical feats for Piercing and Bludgeoning deal an extra 1d6, it seems odd that the feat for Slashing would only be an extra 1.
wonlee76 08-22-07, 11:20 AM	Well, there's an excellent reason why this feat should be 1d6 instead of 1 but considering that there is definitely an inconsistency between 2 similar feats in the same book, who's to say that Flay Foe is the one that is the mistake and not Pulverizing Foe (or whatever the piercing version of the feat is called)? Its apparent you're aware of the rule that text description beats the table's description (since WOTC in the editing process is pretty notorious for editing feats/spells and whatnot but forgetting to fix the tables) but there's really nothing to support that Pulverizing Foe is the "right" feat vs. Flay Foe. Its a judgment call by the DM since there's no errata clarifying this. I would personally say it should be 1d6 since the Pierce/Bludgeon version is 1d6 but it wouldn't shock me that the Slash version was downgraded but they forgot to downgrade the Pierce/Bludgeon version too.
Pechvarry 08-22-07, 12:43 PM	+1/hit crits, +1d6/hit doesn't... Not a whole lot, but if you happen to dual wield keen scimitars, there's the slim possibility you'll get more mileage with the feat as written.
Remedyx 08-22-07, 03:54 PM	Just to further help out here are the basic benifits of the feats... Flay Foe: if you hit the same enemy more than once in a single round with a slashing melee weapon, you deal an extra point of damage with each hit after the first Pulverize Foe:if you hit the same enemy more than once in a single round with a bludgeoning melee weapon, you deal an extra 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage with each hit after the first Skewer Foe:if you hit the same enemy more than once in a single round with a piercing melee weapon, you deal an extra 1d6 points of piercing damage with each hit after the first the reqs for the feats are all the same with the exception of having a prof. in slashing, bludgeoning, or piercing weapon the chart lists all as doing an extra 1d6 in damage. And just for everyone to know this would be my next feat because I am playing a Dervish and any extra damage I can get would help our group out as I am the only person who is a Fighter-type.
runestar 08-22-07, 09:21 PM	Should be 1d6, IMO. An extra point of damage doesn't really amount to anything.