3.0 Heavy Fortification Vs. Vorpal Weapon? [Archive] - Wizards Community

3.0 Heavy Fortification Vs. Vorpal Weapon? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Vorgrim
05-11-05, 12:15 AM Ok, my question is pretty straight forward. Since a Vorpal weapon only Performs as a Vorpal weapon on a Confirmed Crit (in 3.0) If the target is wearing an item of Heavy Fortification will it nullify the Vorpal effect, since the Heavy Fort allows 0% chance of a Critical hit? Or does the Vorpal effect supercede the Heavy Fortification? I know the Vorpal effect is a +5 i think Heavy fort. is a +3 or more.

I looked for discussions on this topic, but alas either my search meathods were flawed or some unearthly force didnt want me to find out :).

Thanks for any help you can offer.
Flushmaster
05-11-05, 12:54 AM By 3.0 rules, I think that the heavy fortification negates the vorpal effect because it requires a critical hit. This makes such armor probably the only defense against a +4 keen vorpal scimitar wielded by a fighter with improved critical (scimitar). Kind of cheesy, albeit expensive. Then again, it might be like the elemental burst abilities that activate upon a rolled and confirmed critical even if no damage is multiplied because the target is immune to critical hits (the zombie still takes the extra d10 from the blast of heat/cold/etc).

I do know that 3.5 rules specifically require a natural 20 to activate the vorpal ability, along with a critical confirmation. But sice it doesn't actually say that the hit itself has to be a critical, I would rule it to be exactly like the burst weapon thing that I mentioned above; the vorpal effect happens anyways. In most cases, like undead (except vampires) and constructs, the vorpal effect wouldn't really change much (why does a golem need a head, really?) except maybe blind.deafen a zombie, at the most, but when the immunity to crits comes from heavy fortification instead of being a natural immunity and your head gets lopped off then you're probably quite dead.
Always-Late
05-11-05, 01:02 AM You could try the extremely dangerous common sense approach: Armor of Fortification has a lot of extra armor in the places you need it. The neck is one of them.
VerinBlod
05-11-05, 05:39 AM IMO the heavy fortification nullifies the vorpal sword. At least that is how I always ruled it.
Vorgrim
05-11-05, 08:23 PM thanks for the replies all.
Lord Ian Stark
05-11-05, 10:28 PM How does the 3.0 version word it?

The 3.5 says -
Fortification: This suit of armor or shield produces a magical force that protects vital areas of the wearer more effectively. When a critical hit or sneak attack is scored on the wearer, there is a chance that the critical hit or sneak attack is negated and damage is instead rolled normally.

So yes, you don't roll extra damage dice. However the head being removed from the body has nothing to do with extra damage dice. It is an effect that lops off the head if a critical hit is confirmed.

I guess the answer lies within what you think negated means as far as a crit. According to the written rule, all it counts for is the extra damage dice being negated.

However that is a 3.5 answer as I don't have access to how 3.0 has it written. Can someone post it?
VerinBlod
05-12-05, 04:59 AM It's the same:

Fortification: This suit of armor or shield produces a magical force that protects vital areas of the wearer more effectively. When a critical hit or sneak attack is scored on the wearer, there is a chance that the critical hit or sneak attack is negated and damage is instead rolled normally.

See the DMG 3.0 page 181.

Well you're probably right. With heavy fortification you are immune to sneak attacks and critical hits. But the description of vorpal mentions that it can affect both undead and golems albeit they don't suffer much from losing their heads. The description goes on mentioning that the DM may have to make judgment calls about the sword's effect. So after reading both descriptions I would say it still affects you.

So you basically could go both ways: vorpal swords affects persons wearing heavy fortification armour or they don't and it's probably up to the DM.
Vorgrim
05-12-05, 07:32 PM Very cool, good explanation. I can see now why it still would take effect or wouldnt depending on the side of the fence your on. Being that vorpal technically doesnt increase the damage dealt just an effect that isnt protected by fortification.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Vorgrim 05-11-05, 12:15 AM	Ok, my question is pretty straight forward. Since a Vorpal weapon only Performs as a Vorpal weapon on a Confirmed Crit (in 3.0) If the target is wearing an item of Heavy Fortification will it nullify the Vorpal effect, since the Heavy Fort allows 0% chance of a Critical hit? Or does the Vorpal effect supercede the Heavy Fortification? I know the Vorpal effect is a +5 i think Heavy fort. is a +3 or more. I looked for discussions on this topic, but alas either my search meathods were flawed or some unearthly force didnt want me to find out :). Thanks for any help you can offer.
Flushmaster 05-11-05, 12:54 AM	By 3.0 rules, I think that the heavy fortification negates the vorpal effect because it requires a critical hit. This makes such armor probably the only defense against a +4 keen vorpal scimitar wielded by a fighter with improved critical (scimitar). Kind of cheesy, albeit expensive. Then again, it might be like the elemental burst abilities that activate upon a rolled and confirmed critical even if no damage is multiplied because the target is immune to critical hits (the zombie still takes the extra d10 from the blast of heat/cold/etc). I do know that 3.5 rules specifically require a natural 20 to activate the vorpal ability, along with a critical confirmation. But sice it doesn't actually say that the hit itself has to be a critical, I would rule it to be exactly like the burst weapon thing that I mentioned above; the vorpal effect happens anyways. In most cases, like undead (except vampires) and constructs, the vorpal effect wouldn't really change much (why does a golem need a head, really?) except maybe blind.deafen a zombie, at the most, but when the immunity to crits comes from heavy fortification instead of being a natural immunity and your head gets lopped off then you're probably quite dead.
Always-Late 05-11-05, 01:02 AM	You could try the extremely dangerous common sense approach: Armor of Fortification has a lot of extra armor in the places you need it. The neck is one of them.
VerinBlod 05-11-05, 05:39 AM	IMO the heavy fortification nullifies the vorpal sword. At least that is how I always ruled it.
Vorgrim 05-11-05, 08:23 PM	thanks for the replies all.
Lord Ian Stark 05-11-05, 10:28 PM	How does the 3.0 version word it? The 3.5 says - Fortification: This suit of armor or shield produces a magical force that protects vital areas of the wearer more effectively. When a critical hit or sneak attack is scored on the wearer, there is a chance that the critical hit or sneak attack is negated and damage is instead rolled normally. So yes, you don't roll extra damage dice. However the head being removed from the body has nothing to do with extra damage dice. It is an effect that lops off the head if a critical hit is confirmed. I guess the answer lies within what you think negated means as far as a crit. According to the written rule, all it counts for is the extra damage dice being negated. However that is a 3.5 answer as I don't have access to how 3.0 has it written. Can someone post it?
VerinBlod 05-12-05, 04:59 AM	It's the same: Fortification: This suit of armor or shield produces a magical force that protects vital areas of the wearer more effectively. When a critical hit or sneak attack is scored on the wearer, there is a chance that the critical hit or sneak attack is negated and damage is instead rolled normally. See the DMG 3.0 page 181. Well you're probably right. With heavy fortification you are immune to sneak attacks and critical hits. But the description of vorpal mentions that it can affect both undead and golems albeit they don't suffer much from losing their heads. The description goes on mentioning that the DM may have to make judgment calls about the sword's effect. So after reading both descriptions I would say it still affects you. So you basically could go both ways: vorpal swords affects persons wearing heavy fortification armour or they don't and it's probably up to the DM.
Vorgrim 05-12-05, 07:32 PM	Very cool, good explanation. I can see now why it still would take effect or wouldnt depending on the side of the fence your on. Being that vorpal technically doesnt increase the damage dealt just an effect that isnt protected by fortification.