D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
OK, I don't know how to frame the search for this, or where to look in the rules for the answer.
What, if any, bonuses get applied to secondary damage effects from powers? By secondary effects I mean things like the following, many of which are described slightly differently:
- starting your turn next to a flaming sphere (Wizard Daily 1) and taking "1d4 + Intelligence modifier fire damage", listed under Effect
- leaving the zone of visions of ruin (Wizard Daily 9) and taking "2d8 + Intelligence modifier psychic damage", listed under Effect
- hitting a dragon Sorcerer after he's used burning spray (Sorcerer At-will 1) which does "fire damage equal to your Strength modifier", listed under Hit
- starting your turn next to the target of explosive pyre (Sorcerer Encounter 1) and taking "1d6 fire damage", listed under Hit
- hitting a dragon Sorcerer after he's used lightning breath (Sorcerer Daily 1) which does "5 lightning damage", listed under Hit
So, there are secondary effects that do <dice>, <modifier>, <dice + modifier>, and <fixed value> damage. All of the powers have the Implement keyword. Which, if any of these, would get to add the enhancement value of the implement used?
What brings this up is that I've always taken it for granted that the secondary effect of flaming sphere could add the implement's enhancement bonus to its damage. However, it doesn't look right when applied to the fixed damage of lightning breath, even though if it applies to one it should really apply to the other.
As a rule, only add enhancement (or other) modifiers if the damage is rolled, and only add ability modifiers is specifically told to do so.
Flaming Sphere does 1d4 + Int + enhancement
Leaving Visions of Ruin does 2d8 + Int + enhancement
Hitting the sorcerer using Burning Spray does Str mod
Starting next to Explosive Pyre does 1d6 + enhancement (no Cha bonus)
Hitting the Lightning Breath sorcerer does 5 damage
As a rule, only add enhancement (or other) modifiers if the damage is rolled, and only add ability modifiers is specifically told to do so.
Flaming Sphere does 1d4 + Int + enhancement
Leaving Visions of Ruin does 2d8 + Int + enhancement
Hitting the sorcerer using Burning Spray does Str mod
Starting next to Explosive Pyre does 1d6 + enhancement (no Cha bonus)
Hitting the Lightning Breath sorcerer does 5 damage
This is more or less the conclusion I came to as well, but I don't really like the effect it has on a few of the powers in PHB2 - there's that invoker at-will that does flat damage for its *initial* effect, for example.
Also, pay attention to keywords: Dragonflame Mantle isn't an Implement power, so it doesn't get an enhancement bonus, but it is a damage roll on an Arcane power so it gets the sorcerer's Power Source bonus damage.
The breakdown in post #3 is the one that feels best to me also, and is what I would use unless an actual rule with an actual page number were to contradict it.
This is actually an area of ongoing, if intermittent, contention.
There are really only two credible interpretations. Which one seems more valid basically depends on your value system - neither one is unambiguously more "proper" than the other. (As support for this last point, the number of supporters of each side does appear to reach rough parity, each time it comes up, though the personality types on each side seem to cluster.)
Interpretation one: What matters is that the damage is rolled, rather than a nonrandom number. (I'm avoiding "static" because that's got a specific meaning.) This tends to be favored by rules literalists, and character optimizers. Tends to be disfavored by field-levellers and mathy types. Interpretation one is currently supported by a Customer Service ruling which is slightly less ambiguous than those in support of interpretation two.
Interpretation two: What matters is whether the damage is the immediate result of an attack roll, or whether it's due to some other (usually lasting and/or conditional) effect. Interpretation two is generally supported and opposed by the opposite people from the broad lists above. Interpretation two is also supported by an interview, I believe at GenCon a while back, with one of the designers (possibly Johnathan Tweet, I don't recall). I'd have to go back to those argument threads to find the specific sourcing.
I am personally of the opinion that interpretation two is the correct one. This is based on some excellent analysis work both here and over on the WotC forums, where it was demonstrated for a number of powers that the powers which include secondary damage are indisputably stronger than other powers of their class and level, if you include the bonuses... but are essentially comparable if you don't. (For example, Flaming Sphere breaks even with other powers of its level after the first one or two sustain actions; it's inferior right off the bat, but superior if you keep it up awhile, which is the whole point of it being the sustained one in the bunch.)
This goes for several otherwise-very-powerful things like the fighter's Rain of Steel stance; when the rule of thumb is "you didn't have to roll to hit, you don't get the bonus damage" then they tend to come out quite neatly versus the other powers of their class and level.
There's also the Invoker's Grasping Shards at-will, which suffers from a huge discontinuity under interpretation 1: at 20th level, it's distinctly unimpressive, because unlike every other available power it has not gained the benefit of damage bonuses (because there is no die roll). Then at level 21 it has a relatively trivial die roll added, and jumps tremendously due to this ruling. Whereas if it had added comparable bonuses all along, then the damage die simply adds its value to the power, for a precisely equivalent upgrade to every other At-Will as you hit level 21.
The interview basically said that the whole thing should revolve around the phrasing that damage bonuses accrue "when you use" a power. With the point being that you are only "using" the power during the actual action you used to do so. Almost always this involves an attack roll. All of your examples occur outside of the action taken to use the power, and do not involve an attack roll, so they would not (under interpretation II) gain the bonus damage.
Note that the sustain:standard on Flaming Sphere does require an attack roll and take an action to perform, so it clearly gains the bonus. Even powers which roll an attack and "consume" only a free action still occur during the context of an action you are taking; the type of action doesn't matter.
Without having seen someone run the stats on it, I would be leaning toward the one in post #3 as well. But since I am interested in making sure that there are as few "hidden suck" and "hidden super" powers as possible, so that players' decision spaces are maximized, and since I'm equipped to check the math and have done so... I'm sold on interpretation two.
Wow... I've never seen any basis for any argument other than the 'on damage roll' interpretation, and I do tend to notice such things.
That said, nice job making the first sound distasteful by associating it with character optimizers and rules literalists, though
Personally, I almost wish you got damage bonuses under much more rigorously controlled circumstances... like Twin Strike or Rain of Blows only getting it once, no matter how many times you hit would suit me well. Totally not RAW, though.
Huh. I might be inclined to go with Eric Finley's "interpretation two" (though I'd never heard such an argument articulated clearly before)... But there doesn't seem to be anything in the text itself that would support that claim - and it requires making the unintuitive judgment that sometimes rolling for damage doesn't count as a damage roll. I'd really like to see some unambiguous and definitive official word on this, as it hugely affects quite a few powers.
(I just did a test in the character builder, and it clearly follows Interpretation 1 (at least for primary damage, which is the only thing it calculates out for you). I made a Level 20 invoker, gave him a +5 implement, and the damage is only Wis mod for Grasping Shards. Bump him up to 21 and he suddenly gets enhancement to damage as well.)
The RAW are totally clear that it's #1... #2 might work for a house rule, but I'm not sure it's a good idea since there are several powers that are intentionally balanced as if they didn't get the extra bonuses.
Of course, the extra bonuses have gotten large enough that it makes those powers less popular.
There have been at least two fairly active (and argumentative) threads about this over on the WotC boards, and at least one IIRC here. They all follow pretty much the same course, which is what I was trying to summarize in my post.
And yes, Keterys, you're right; I had been struggling for good terms for the two types of people I was seeing, and those seemed like the best terms. I didn't cross-check 'em for bias or appearance of bias, and it looks like some subconscious bias did sneak in there. Add one more group to that list, possibly the largest one (though by far less vocal than the ones I listed)... players who are hesitant to house-rule things or to pick less intuitive interpretations without a damn good iron-clad reason.
Anyway, as I say, the math convinces me. I'm not shy of house-rules, quite the reverse, though, so of course YMMV.
Yeah, I'm trying to nail down what I'd like to do as far as a house rule goes myself. I think unfortunately my answer is a bit too convoluted to really use.
Honestly, try this: All powers which do only attribute modifier or constant damage add "1d0" to the damage rating; they are all "rolls." However, damage bonuses can apply to only one damage roll during an action (that is, Action); in general this will be the first one that hits, if you hit an edge case ask the DM before taking the power. Note that close and area attacks roll damage only once; the bonus applies to the roll and thus to the damage inflicted on every target of the power who gets hit. Most importantly, anytime damage occurs outside of the time-frame of an action you have taken (and whose action was a power use which inflicted that damage), it is not eligible for your static bonuses - this covers ongoing damage, conditional damage, start-of-turn or aura damage, and so forth.
Also, for the love of Pete, house-rule fix Reckless and Bloodclaw. Static bonuses aren't nearly so horrible if you rewrite these effects into what the designers pretty obviously meant for them to do - apply to their own attacks only, once only per penalty taken, and so forth.
I'm not entirely convinced that Grasping Shards, Furious Smash, and Knockdown Assault need a major boost like that, though.
I'm reasonably certain that many powers don't.
Grasping shadows (not to be confused with grasping shards) is already among the better level 1 wizard encounter spells, but that change would up the static damage considerably.
Last edited by Trevelyan; 15th June 2009 at 06:14 PM..
Reason: Clarity shards vs shadows
Grasping shadows (not to be confused with grasping shards) is already among the better level 1 wizard encounter spells, but that change would up the static damage considerably.
I think his suggested change wouldn't apply to secondary static damages like in Grasping Shadows or Grasp of the Grave (so many grasping things!), since those have actual damage rolls.
I don't know if the intention would be to apply to Reaping Strike or Hammer Rhythm, which deal static damage on a miss?
In truth, the real problem is massive bonuses available to the damage roll and higher levels when critical hits become far more common. Take away iron armbands of power and bloodclaw/reckless and it's far more tame of a difference. Eh.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
