Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Darkarius 08-14-07, 08:25 AM	Ok...I hope I am doing this in the right section...but I would like some advice on a very touchy subject.......Critical hits. Now I have been a DM through all editions of D&D...yes a long time......Now with the 3.5 rules...it has gotten exceedingly tactical and hard with all the new books and rules......So here is the question. Ok I understand that with ray and touch attacks for ARCANE spells can be criticaled......but I had a dispute from one of my very experienced players....and I have to disagree on this one...... I upgraded a module called Faction War and one of the Clerics was using a "Harm" spell(he is 15th level so noramlly 150 hp of damage is applied on a successful touch)....he got a natural 20 and then confirmed it........Now I refuse to believe that it would do 300 hp of damage.......It is from the Cleric's spell list and I was under the impression that a spell that came from a deity... was a set amount of damage....especially in cases like this.... My player said ALL touch attacks that deliver damage do this.......I read the players handbook and Dm's guide and it confirmed this...but only used Arcane spells as the example.......Can someone give me the ruling on Cleric,Ranger,Druid spells as far as criticals go?? I mean if touch attacks do this wouldn't it mean that if a confirmed critical on a touch for any type of healing spells would do double the normal healing to...since they are considered "touch"??? I guess i have a hard time believing that a cleric who already is formidable with melee, has no spell failure from armor, could critical w/ a set inflict spell from a deity who only grants "a touch of it's power".......Could someone verify the ruling...thank you very much on this......... ---a frustrated DM
LCD2YOU 08-14-07, 08:29 AM	Actually as much as I hate to agree with a whiney ass player, I think they're right. If you have to roll to touch something with a spell and you get a 20 with confirmation, it is a critical and the damage from a Harm spell becomes 300. Just remember it cuts two ways.
DragosteaChiroptera 08-14-07, 08:29 AM	I would say that critical hits generally only occur when there is a random amount of damage. Ex: 10d6 from fireball. I think that Harm explicitly does "10 damage per cleric level up until 15th" capping damage at 150. Since that's a set amount of damage for everyone casting the spell, I would say no crit. Even if you disagree with that, the damage cap is set at 150, crit or no crit, right?
LCD2YOU 08-14-07, 08:35 AM	I would say that critical hits generally only occur when there is a random amount of damage. Ex: 10d6 from fireball.The problem is that several spells, such as Fireball or Magic Missile requires no "to hit". MM are "fire and forget". Fireballs are area effect and I hope you got some good Reflex saves.I think that Harm explicitly does "10 damage per cleric level up until 15th" capping damage at 150. Since that's a set amount of damage for everyone casting the spell, I would say no crit. Even if you disagree with that, the damage cap is set at 150, crit or no crit, right?As for random dice damage only spells, I can't seem to remember that as a factor against it. I could be wrong though. Do you have a ref to it?
jacob22 08-14-07, 08:38 AM	I disagree with the player. The reasoning is thus: the point of a critical is your attack lands in a vulnerable spot. So the melee attack may hit the neck or a major artery. A touch based spell is binary, either it hits or it does not. You get no extra damage if you touched them on the jugular or the eyeball. The reasoning here is the spell power does not increase based on where the touch occurs. It's like contact poison: does a poison do more damage if it touches your tongue vs your pinky? No, of course not. It just needs contact to get into your system.
LCD2YOU 08-14-07, 08:53 AM	I disagree with the player. The reasoning is thus: the point of a critical is your attack lands in a vulnerable spot. So the melee attack may hit the neck or a major artery. A touch based spell is binary, either it hits or it does not. You get no extra damage if you touched them on the jugular or the eyeball. The reasoning here is the spell power does not increase based on where the touch occurs. It's like contact poison: does a poison do more damage if it touches your tongue vs your pinky? No, of course not. It just needs contact to get into your system.But there's this problem: Touch You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch as many willing targets as you can reach as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell.And Harm:Harm Necromancy Level: Clr 6, Destruction 6 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Touch Target: Creature touched Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Will half; see text Spell Resistance: Yes Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1. If used on an undead creature, harm acts like heal.As Harm is a Touch spell and requires a "to hit", it will crit on a natural 20. There is nothing in the description that overrides the basic "Touch" rules. As for it doing a crit, I like to think that the energy went right through the heart, brain stem, kidneys, etc., of the victim. That is why it did so much damage.
Pegasos989 08-14-07, 09:17 AM	I disagree with the player. The reasoning is thus: the point of a critical is your attack lands in a vulnerable spot. So the melee attack may hit the neck or a major artery. A touch based spell is binary, either it hits or it does not. You get no extra damage if you touched them on the jugular or the eyeball. The reasoning here is the spell power does not increase based on where the touch occurs. It's like contact poison: does a poison do more damage if it touches your tongue vs your pinky? No, of course not. It just needs contact to get into your system. So, you think it is exactly the same whether scorching ray hits you in the face or the leg? Or wheter the highly electric shock of shocking grasp hits your leg or heart? It matters just as much where touch spell hits as it does where a normal attack does. What makes it a touch is that it doesn't matter if there is that leather armor in between the scorching ray and you or not. And whether poison has varying effects on where you have been poisoned does indeed matter. A simple bee poison near the throat can kill many people sensitive to it, even when the same poison in the leg wouldn't have done that. Poisons don't have crit rules as far as I know but touch spells do and can crit. However, I am not quite sure if the 150 cap still stays.
heffroncm 08-14-07, 09:45 AM	And it still has the save for half damage, which would drop it to 150 (and let's face it, almost everything at that level makes the Fort or Will save), and it won't drop them past 1 HP. It seems REALLY GROSS, but it's not any worse than Banishment or Undeath to Death in the right situations, or Disintegrate or Eyebite from the Wizard list. 6th level spells is where you run into magic that takes a target out of the combat outright if they fail their save. It only gets worse from there. And no, the 150 cap would not stay, just like a critical blow with a Longsword or Shocking Graps can do more damage than a normal hit.
Hagroth 08-14-07, 02:00 PM	But there's this problem: And Harm:As Harm is a Touch spell and requires a "to hit", it will crit on a natural 20. There is nothing in the description that overrides the basic "Touch" rules. As for it doing a crit, I like to think that the energy went right through the heart, brain stem, kidneys, etc., of the victim. That is why it did so much damage. There may be nothing in the description that overrides the basic "Touch" rules, but the GM's decision overrides EVERYTHING. As a GM (and as a player), if the GM makes an interpretation of a vague rule, then that's the way it is. As long as the rule is applied equally between players and opponents, and as long as game play is not unbalanced, there isn't much of a problem. Personally, I don't think any spell, touch or otherwise, should be eligible for a critical. Most attack spells increase in damage when the spell caster goes up in levels. Contrarily, rarely will damage increase from a fighter's sword simply because he goes up a level. I view critical hits as a way to better way to simulate actual combat and as a way to allow weapon users a chance to increase their damage.
LCD2YOU 08-14-07, 02:21 PM	There may be nothing in the description that overrides the basic "Touch" rules, but the GM's decision overrides EVERYTHING. As a GM (and as a player), if the GM makes an interpretation of a vague rule, then that's the way it is. As long as the rule is applied equally between players and opponents, and as long as game play is not unbalanced, there isn't much of a problem. Personally, I don't think any spell, touch or otherwise, should be eligible for a critical. Most attack spells increase in damage when the spell caster goes up in levels. Contrarily, rarely will damage increase from a fighter's sword simply because he goes up a level. I view critical hits as a way to better way to simulate actual combat and as a way to allow weapon users a chance to increase their damage.Yeah, Rule "0". I did not invoke it. But I was under the impression that the OP was looking for RAW to back him up.
Pegasos989 08-14-07, 02:41 PM	Personally, I don't think any spell, touch or otherwise, should be eligible for a critical. Most attack spells increase in damage when the spell caster goes up in levels. Contrarily, rarely will damage increase from a fighter's sword simply because he goes up a level. I view critical hits as a way to better way to simulate actual combat and as a way to allow weapon users a chance to increase their damage. Well, fighter's BAB goes up and he can trade it for damage with power attack. It is very similar.
VulcanStormwrath 08-14-07, 03:03 PM	Think of Harm as a violent shockwave of divine energy. Imagine it discharging into the target's arm. Now envision the same shockwave delivered to the base of the brain, or delivered with a heartpunch. Where a spell is delivered definitely makes a difference. Ever taken fire damage to the eyes? I have.
Ace_of_time 08-14-07, 03:19 PM	Well the 3.5 faq says you still can't lower the person/creature HP below 1. so the damage on a crit would depend on the HP of they thing you use it on more than double damage. Also they would have to save for massive damage rule which is apart from the spell and could still kill it.
MrCustomer 08-14-07, 03:49 PM	There is no limit to Cleric Spell Damage, a Critical is a Critical, that reasoning is wrong. However I beleive that the damage would not be doubled in this case anyways. Critical Hits only effect the primary damage, secondary damage, such as Sneak Attack, Weapon Effects like a Fiery Sword, Posioned Weapons, etc. the damage is not multiplied with the critical effect. The Damage is not multiplied due to the saving throw in this attack. Scorching Ray does direct damage and is multiplied on a critical hit. but in this case it is no different then striking a target with a feather to get contact poison on them, the target makes a poison save and the critical hit does not effect the poisons damage, only the feather's 0 damage. In this case you make a touch attack and the target makes a save against your power. Because it is a save this effect is not the primary damage and not effected by the critical. Inflict Critical Wounds however would effected by the critical since there is no saving throw, it is primary damage.
fatmonkey 08-14-07, 04:03 PM	If it does damage And it requires an attack roll It can crit Unless stated it crits on 20 and does 2x damage Divine spells have no special rule that says they can not critical while Arcane spells can
Pegasos989 08-14-07, 04:03 PM	There is no limit to Cleric Spell Damage, a Critical is a Critical, that reasoning is wrong. However I beleive that the damage would not be doubled in this case anyways. Critical Hits only effect the primary damage, secondary damage, such as Sneak Attack, Weapon Effects like a Fiery Sword, Posioned Weapons, etc. the damage is not multiplied with the critical effect. The Damage is not multiplied due to the saving throw in this attack. Scorching Ray does direct damage and is multiplied on a critical hit. but in this case it is no different then striking a target with a feather to get contact poison on them, the target makes a poison save and the critical hit does not effect the poisons damage, only the feather's 0 damage. In this case you make a touch attack and the target makes a save against your power. Because it is a save this effect is not the primary damage and not effected by the critical. Inflict Critical Wounds however would effected by the critical since there is no saving throw, it is primary damage. Where you get the distinction between primary and secondary damage? Poisons aren't multiplied because they aren't attack or damage, just the effect that comes with it. Sneak attack dice aren't multiplied, because extra dice aren't multiplied on criticals. However, all non-extra dice damage from attacks is multiplied as far as I know.
Magnus029 08-14-07, 04:06 PM	Inflict Critical Wounds however would effected by the critical since there is no saving throw, it is primary damage. Actually this is incorrect Inflict Light Wounds Necromancy Level: Clr 1, Destruction 1 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Touch Target: Creature touched Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Will half Spell Resistance: Yes When laying your hand upon a creature, you channel negative energy that deals 1d8 points of damage +1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Since undead are powered by negative energy, this spell cures such a creature of a like amount of damage, rather than harming it. Inflict Critical Wounds Necromancy Level: Clr 4, Destruction 4 This spell functions like inflict light wounds, except that you deal 4d8 points of damage +1 point per caster level (maximum +20). Since Inflict Critical functions the same as inflict light, there is in fact a saving throw... the only mechanical differences between the inflict spells and harm is that Harm can not kill you and has set damage... both in fact allow saves, and since they both requite touch attacks you can crit with them.
feraltibbit 08-14-07, 04:12 PM	Usually it only applies 2 arcanix like rays, lines or blasts. Look closely, however, at EVERY spell, esp. if it has something 2 do w/touch, 2 C if crits can be applied. Make your call from there.
pres_man 08-14-07, 04:23 PM	If you want to see something really strange, look at cure light wounds. Attacking an undead you can crit and do double damage. "Attacking" a living creature, can you crit and do double healing?
Drag0nUL 08-14-07, 04:37 PM	If you want to see something really strange, look at cure light wounds. Attacking an undead you can crit and do double damage. "Attacking" a living creature, can you crit and do double healing? I assume you can, but in order to do that you have to roll an attack, and that means you also have the chance to miss so it balances out in the end.
XerelinFexdrion 08-14-07, 05:16 PM	arcane or divine doesn't matter when it comes to primary or secondary damage. if the primary damage is divine OR arcane it will critical, but if it's secondar then it won't. in the case of the touch attack and Harm spell. the touch is the primary and the spell discharging is secondary to it. (this is because the spell could not discharge without the touch happening first). thus making the DMG = 150 plus touch att dmg (if applicable) this is my personal opinion on the matter and the rule i go by with my group. if someone else has a better explination then i'd love to hear it and incorporate it. Xer-
DCAnderson 08-14-07, 05:22 PM	I assume you can, but in order to do that you have to roll an attack, and that means you also have the chance to miss so it balances out in the end. Coup de grace cure light wounds is where it's at :cool:
dknight100 08-14-07, 05:40 PM	Coup de grace cure light wounds is where it's at :cool: Yea, but if coup de grace cure light wounds acted like a coup de grace backwards, would they have to die if they passed their save?
Lord_Varos 08-14-07, 06:08 PM	To answer the OP's question: The only difference between Arcane and Divine magic is the way in which it is prepared and which classes can cast them. As to critical Cure Light Wounds: A critical with a healing spell such as Cure Light Wounds wouldn't be very useful, since a critical hit only multiplies damage. And Cure X Wounds spells don't deal any damage. But if a caster applied a damage-dealing metamagic feat to a CLW, I believe it would be multiplied then. But one could indeed coup-de-grace an opponent with a Cure spell touch attack. It just would deal 0 damage and the Fortitude save to survive would have a very low DC. Maybe it'd be better to just use an unarmed strike.
Vaelan 08-14-07, 06:20 PM	Darkarius, my advice is to take a look at the context. A Cleric cast a spell and something died. This shouldn't be a huge shock to you. Slay Living is a fifth-level spell. It kills you if you fail the save. Harm does less (300 damage, can't kill) less often (confirmed critical versus saving throw). There is no need to go ban-happy. The reasoning here is the spell power does not increase based on where the touch occurs. This reasoning directly contradicts the text, which states that touch attacks can critically hit and explains what a critical hit means. It also manages to be quite ridiculous when presented with spells like Combust (fire damage on a touch attack). Fire to the face deals no more damage than fire to the leg? Doubtful. "Attacking" a living creature, can you crit and do double healing? I allow it. It happens 1/10th of the time at best and is a really stupid thing to do in combat since you can miss.
Darkarius 08-15-07, 08:10 AM	Thanks for all the advice....... I did of course allow it because of what the PHb and the DM guide said....I just found it alittle odd was all.......It didn't affect the outcome...I was just a little surprised that Clerics could channel that kind of divine power when their god already "allotted" them their little portion of power.........I was just under the impression that only Arcane could critical....but I understand it now......Definitely changes the aspect now for the next D&D session for me...being that the group will be encountering alot of vile clerics of Tenebrous and Orcus.......Should be a hoot. Oh and one more question.....I am pretty sure I know the answer....but all of your insight is always appreciated.............. If you don't have improved unarmed strike....touch attacks provoke attacks of opportunity right??? Thanks again Power players....later
pres_man 08-15-07, 08:24 AM	Oh and one more question.....I am pretty sure I know the answer....but all of your insight is always appreciated.............. If you don't have improved unarmed strike....touch attacks provoke attacks of opportunity right??? Thanks again Power players....later Nope, well maybe. If you have a touch attack spell you are using then no, you do not draw an attack of opportunity, because you threaten the area you can reach into. If you attempt to do a touch attack to start a grapple and don't have the Improved Grapple feat, then yes. What if you had a touch attack spell (inflict light wounds let's say), and tried to start a grapple? :whatsthis hmm...
Maudite 08-15-07, 12:45 PM	A creature that deals energy or ability draining damage can critical on their attacks, thusly draining twice the energy from you. I don't think the casting of harm should differ too much from that. Of course if you want to house rule it then go ahead.
XerelinFexdrion 08-15-07, 01:06 PM	that's true with the drain example. with harm though. the spell discription provides us with a cap. if the caster was, lets say, level 6 then the spell would do 60 DMG, but if it critical then it would do 120. (not breaking the cap) if a level 8 caster gets a critical, however, the DMG would be 160, but the cap brings it down to 150.
Ohtar Turinson 08-15-07, 01:13 PM	I'd let the players have their crit, unless you house ruled it out ahead of time. I don't like the rules for touch crit- I disagree with the idea of something that requires a save critting, while I see where it's coming from with scorching ray and the like. What was he critting on, out of curiosity? And how is faction war going? I never have converted that even though I meant to a few years ago.
VulcanStormwrath 08-15-07, 04:58 PM	Nope, well maybe. If you have a touch attack spell you are using then no, you do not draw an attack of opportunity, because you threaten the area you can reach into. If you attempt to do a touch attack to start a grapple and don't have the Improved Grapple feat, then yes. What if you had a touch attack spell (inflict light wounds let's say), and tried to start a grapple? :whatsthis hmm... Any physical contact with another being discharges the held spell.
pres_man 08-15-07, 05:11 PM	Any physical contact with another being discharges the held spell. Yes, but would you draw an AoO for the touch attack to start a grapple if you had a touch spell charged at the time?
VulcanStormwrath 08-15-07, 08:03 PM	Yes since the touch spell is incidental. The act of initiating a grapple is what leaves you open.
Darkarius 08-16-07, 11:39 AM	I'd let the players have their crit, unless you house ruled it out ahead of time. I don't like the rules for touch crit- I disagree with the idea of something that requires a save critting, while I see where it's coming from with scorching ray and the like. What was he critting on, out of curiosity? And how is faction war going? I never have converted that even though I meant to a few years ago. He was critting on an Arrow Demon..........I had to upgrade the encounters and the fact that the pcs are higher levels and with so many new classes,races and such.....it was more challenging........Especially when you have a half-warforged/half brass golem psionicist in the group......... Faction War is going pretty good......I kinda of screwed up and ran Die Vecna Die before Faction War......due to the whole Armory thing....but all in all it works because I added my own touches to it now.......The Goristro in the Darkstorm chapter did the golem in....so it made my day a little easier as far as complications on crits later and such.....The Tome of Battle is a hard book to understand if you don't read it front to back with all the stances and such......The other pc is a Hexblade/Crusader/War Shaper/Chameleon....and he is a Changling....making him a difficult pc to DM....All in all though I would upgrade it....and run it...just add alot of side stuff to....it keeps it more interesting.......I changed the ending alittle to....same basic ending but the Baaetzu and Tanar'ri will be chasing the pcs during the whole Sigil Spell casting and start another little blood War battle in the middle of it for control.....keeps it interesting.
Darkarius 08-16-07, 11:42 AM	Great....I think I got most of my bases covered now.....Thanks for all the advice Gods of the D20 system........So much to remember and with 8 people in the group, it has been hell to control....yea big group...it was bigger before.
qwerty1 08-16-07, 11:48 AM	Roll a "Touch Attack" Hmmm. All attacks can be Critical can't they?
LCD2YOU 08-16-07, 01:21 PM	Roll a "Touch Attack" Hmmm. All attacks can be Critical can't they?Area affect spells, Fireball, Cone of Cold and the like can't. Neither can those spells that require no "to hit", Magic Missile is the penultimate example.
AntiDjinn 08-16-07, 10:50 PM	You can solve this simply by using the rules as written. PHB p. 114: "When your character scores a critical hit, roll the damage two, three, or four times as indicated." (Note: It is not a single value times a multiple, you are supposed to actually roll the dice that many more times). PHB p. 140: "A critical hit means you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together." PHB p. 306: "Critical hit damage is usually double damage, which means rolling damage twice" That is three separate instances where the book tells you exactly what happens on a critical hit. So here is how it plays out: Player: I got a crit on my Harm spell, so that means...... DM: You roll your dice of damage twice (or simply roll twice as many dice). Player: But Harm doesn't do dice of damage. There is no roll to double. DM: Bingo. Roll your zero dice twice and then it does exactly what it does on a critical: No extra dice of damage, but it does trigger any effects that go off with a crit (such as feats that may apply on a critical hit). If nonvariable damage was affected by criticals doesn't anyone supposed it would have been mentioned at least once with 3 opportunities to do so?
Vaelan 08-17-07, 05:00 AM	You can solve this simply by using the rules as written. Yes, you can go into a frenzy of rules-lawyering to argue against something that has been objectively shown as no big deal. Forgive me if I don't see the benefit. Also, since you're fabricating the proposal that the person using Harm rolled a 0, one could just as easily fabricate the proposal that you rolled a 0+10/CL, making multiplication possible. If nonvariable damage was affected by criticals doesn't anyone supposed it would have been mentioned at least once with 3 opportunities to do so? Harm and Heal are the only things in the core ruleset that deal such nonvariable damage. It is perfectly reasonable to believe that they failed to account for it when writing the rules for critical hits, especially when you consider that Harm and Heal were made into this sort of nonvariable damage in the half-assed revision.
AntiDjinn 08-18-07, 03:17 AM	Yes, you can go into a frenzy of rules-lawyering to argue against something that has been objectively shown as no big deal. Forgive me if I don't see the benefit. Rules lawyering = has actually read the books and understands what is written there. Quoting the text that is actually printed instead of just stating what you wish it said is hardly a frenzy. Have you ever actually looked for a example in any of the books? You frenzied rules lawyer. Or is it only rules lawyering or flavor text when it doesn't support your hypothesis and OK to quote the book when it does? Also, since you're fabricating the proposal that the person using Harm rolled a 0, one could just as easily fabricate the proposal that you rolled a 0+10/CL, making multiplication possible. Actually what I wrote in English is that zero dice are rolled, not that he rolled a zero. Do you require an expaination of the difference? Yes, he still gets his 10 per level, but the text (yes, horrors, we must actually open it) states exactly how the added damage is dermined: By the roll of additional dice. What type of dice? The same as you normally roll for damage? What kind is that for Harm? d-nada! Does Harm mention that its damage is bonus damage that is added to a damage roll and therefore doubled as Str damage is? Find the text and get back to me. That is, if locating text would be reducing yourself to rules lawyering.
pres_man 08-18-07, 11:44 AM	If nonvariable damage was affected by criticals doesn't anyone supposed it would have been mentioned at least once with 3 opportunities to do so? You mean like: PHB p. 140: "A critical hit means you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together." Also there is this: Exception: Extra damage over and above a weapon’s normal damage is not multiplied when you score a critical hit.