Criticals and double dice

[Jester David]

Good point.

By "poison" I mean things that trigger a Con save for additional damage.

I don't have a RAW reference for that. But Sage Advice seems to be clear that's the case (though without explaining exactly what rule that leads to this conclusion).

(If poison are to be doubled, I'm even more confused.)

I think I get your question.

Specifically, are secondary effects of attacks also doubled on a critical.
Such as the basilisk that does 10 piercing damage plus 7 poison damage on a hit versus a quasit whose tail does piercing damage and forces a save causing additional poison damage.

Most examples do seem to either be status effects or poison. But I can imagine an undead creature hitting with a slam and forcing a saving throw that causes additional necrotic damage.


I don’t see any hard rule clearly differentiating. The RAW answer is that anything tired solely to the hits is doubled, while anything with a save associated is a separate effect. As only the attack’s dice are doubled. They’re two related but distinct sources of damage.
Like a flaming arrow hitting a cask of oil. The arrow can crit, but the resulting side effect of an exploding arrow would have its own save and wouldn’t have dice doubled.
But that’s as much a “ruling” as RAW.

So the basilisk’s poison would be doubled as that is directly caused by the attack. It is the attack’s damage. But the quasit’s poison isn’t caused by the attack so it isn’t doubled.

 

[ccs]

Nowhere is "attack’s damage dice" or "other damage dice" actually defined.

Where does it say poison dice isn't doubled? How about the difference between a DMG poison and the inherent poison damage from a Drow: while the first is gated behind a saving throw the second is not? The question isn't "does the second damage get double while the first is not?" The question is: what, specific, rule passage do you claim for making your answer?

And what about items that deliver extra piercing damage (such as Arrows of Slaying)? How can you justify this being not doubled simply because it's gated behind a save, when the rules never actually talk about this? You can't very well argue it's secondary damage - in the case of poison, yes, but this is just more piercing damage? How is that unlike sneak damage, which does get doubled?

I'd justify it as being the most conservative reading of the rule.

Of course that's not how we do it in the groups I play with.... We're a bit lazy & on a crit we just tally up ALL the damage & double it. It applies to both Team PC & Team DM equally.
Saves a bunch of time & debates about why this/that/something does or doesn't double.

 

[CapnZapp]

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/04/2...divine-smite-how-many-damage-rolls-are-there/
Does this answer your question?

Okay, so this is really it: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/977243506174341120

That is, the rule is nowhere to be found in any rulebook, and relies on a definition Crawford made up in earlier tweets.

I wonder why this wasn't errataed (or at least got an official clarification)?

 

[CapnZapp]

The RAW answer is that anything tired solely to the hits is doubled, while anything with a save associated is a separate effect.

I'm not sure we should say Sage Advice is "RAW". It's nowhere to be found in the rules.

My position is that this is left undefined by the RAW. Of course, Sage Advice makes RAI clear.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think I get your question.

Specifically, are secondary effects of attacks also doubled on a critical.
Such as the basilisk that does 10 piercing damage plus 7 poison damage on a hit versus a quasit whose tail does piercing damage and forces a save causing additional poison damage.

Most examples do seem to either be status effects or poison.

Yes, exactly.

If I was on social media, I would put the following questions to Crawford:

1. The Arrow of Slaying adds 6d10 damage if a Con DC 17 save is failed. Since this damage is not magical or poison but "more piercing", is it still secondary and not extra damage, simply because its gated behind a save?

2. Where in the rules can I find the language you draw upon when you say criticals double extra damage but not secondary damage (damage behind a subsequent saving throw or attack).

 

[CapnZapp]

We're a bit lazy & on a crit we just tally up ALL the damage & double it. It applies to both Team PC & Team DM equally.
Saves a bunch of time & debates about why this/that/something does or doesn't double.

A. Do you simply sum up the damage and then double the total?
B. Or do you roll the dice, sum it up, double it, and then add static modifiers?

We already agree neither is RAW, so that's not why I'm asking.

I'm asking because it seems plenty of people "just double it" without realizing that doubles the static modifiers (such as Strength ability modifier), which is inappropriate if all you intend is to "save time" (that is sticking to RAI even though distribution is coarser).

 

[aco175]

I cannot see doubling the arrow of slaying's extra dice. Being secondary it requires a save to avoid, same with poison if it requires a save to avoid or even take half. I may not consider it part of the attack. The wording seems to say that you need to hit with an attack. Now if the arrow or poison just did the damage on a hit, them it would double, but the need to make a save means that part is not an attack.

I would be cool during the big battle to have the arrow do 20 dice of damage. I could see adding the property to specific items. Kind of like the burst weapons from 3e where you have flaming, but also flaming burst that did more on criticals.

 

[BluejayJunior]

For 2, attacks are defined in the rules as requiring an attack roll ("If there’s ever any question whether something you’re doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you’re making an attack roll, you’re making an attack.") When you score a critical hit (defined as rolling a 20 on an attack), the damage of the attack is doubled. It also states that any extra damage dice that are a result of the attack are also doubled.
A saving throw is not an attack because it does not have an attack roll and therefore cannot be a critical hit.
An attack may trigger additional damage from a saving throw, but the source of the damage is a saving throw and not an attack.
So to answer 1, the extra 6d10 can't be doubled because it is from a saving throw, not an attack.
This is all based on just looking at the rules for attacks and critical hits.

 

[Jester David]

I'm not sure we should say Sage Advice is "RAW". It's nowhere to be found in the rules.


My position is that this is left undefined by the RAW. Of course, Sage Advice makes RAI clear.

Not really. It's there. Just subtle.

2. Where in the rules can I find the language you draw upon when you say criticals double extra damage but not secondary damage (damage behind a subsequent saving throw or attack).

From the Basic Rules:
When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack’s damage against the target.


Emphasis added.


Extra stuff like poison is NOT the attack's damage. It's damage from the attack's effect. It's effectively a secondary attack. The MM entry on "Hit" (see page 11) also confirms that both damage and effects can result from a hit.
Just like having a second attack being triggered by a hit. If a lion or panther pounce a prone target and critical with their claws, their bonus action bite is not a critical as well. Or the bonus effect from Great Weapon Master that allows you to make an additional attack on a critical hit: that second hit is not also automatically a critical.


It's just implicitly stated, not explicitly.

1. The Arrow of Slaying adds 6d10 damage if a Con DC 17 save is failed. Since this damage is not magical or poison but "more piercing", is it still secondary and not extra damage, simply because its gated behind a save?

Correct. It's a secondary property of the item and a second effect tied to the hit. And so it is not tied to the critical.
Just like if a weapon granted a second hit on an attack.


Now, I agree it could be clearer. It's not the most in-your-face rule. But the RAI clarification made in Sage Advice conforms to the rules as presented in the book, and is not a major extrapolation or bit of errata.

 

[jaelis]

When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack’s damage against the target.


Extra stuff like poison is NOT the attack's damage. It's damage from the attack's effect. It's effectively a secondary attack.

That is a reasonable (IMO, the best) interpretation. But it is not stated in the rules.

Would you have dealt the poison damage if the attack had missed? No. Then you can legitimately claim that the poison damage is "part of the attack's damage."