Adent Champion. Rules lawyers required

[DracoSuave]

None of these things you mentioned say "you score a critical hit". They all say "you can score a critical hit" - meaning possibility not certainty.

Fireball does not say you 'can' deal 3d6 + Intellegence damage. So the damage cannot be reduced by general rules such as immunity or resistance. You can't increase it by feats. I know these things -say- you can, but because Fireball doesn't say you 'can' do that amount of damage, this specific power trumps all these other cases.

Thunderwave says I push a creature my wisdom modifier in squares. Now, it doesn't say I -can- so even tho a rule exists saying I can, that doesn't apply because the language is 'definate' and therefore I must push exactly that number of squares.

"you score a critical hit" reads with certainty and that's why precision doesn't apply in this case, because that specific rule disagrees with the general rule of precision.

No, the rule disagrees with the general rule of rolling 20s. It has explicit language that contradicts it. It gives you a situation where you score criticals outside of rolling 20s. That is how an exception works. They are explicit and direct.

The rule doesn't go on to say you automaticly hit, which means that the rule that -governs- those exceptions still applies.

There IS an exception to the first general rule. The second is unmentioned. You are applying it to the wrong rule

How, -exactly- does it do so? Where does the darn ability say you -actually automaticly hit-?

You have a rule that states, BLATANTLY, that scoring a critical hit does not mean that you automaticly hit.

So, what part of 'scoring a critical hit' means that suddenly you can automaticly hit? Exactly? The absense of the word 'can'? Is -that- the difference? Wouldn't it actually be -explicit- when it automatically hit?

Because, and I want to point out, Precision doesn't -actually care.- Whether or not the ability says 'can' is -irrelevant- to Precision.

Check. Is the ability an ability that allows you to score critical hits on non-20 rolls? Yes. Then Precision can apply. Does the ability have any text that -explicitly- states otherwise? No. The 'score critical hit' wording doesn't mean that it is automatic, because if it did, it'd actually say so.

The absense of the word 'can' is not relevant. The absense of the word 'automatic' is the more -telling- word. No language in the ability says otherwise.

There IS no exception, you actually have ti twist the language to find one... and dubiously at that.

In fact, it's such a strong exception to general rules (more than just precision) that it was necessary to spell out what general rules were preserved. (missing on ones).

Because they never include redundant rules text or clarifications in 4th edition?

Because they wanted it to be certain the ability is in no way an exception to the 1s auto miss rule?

This is a strong exception to the rules: Oath of Emnity. It doesn't ambivalantly hint that you might be able to roll two dice.

This ability is -not- a strong exception to the rules. It merely mentions a case that never happens with any other critical range altering ability, because no other ability can 'potentially' crit on a 1.

I thought that was obvious, I mean you don't expect an ability that says 'you can crit on a natural roll of 18-20' to say 'oh by the way, you still miss on a 1' because that IS redundant.

I dunno how better to explain it. You might think 'score a critical hit' doesn't mean 'score a critical hit' and that Precision uses magical space language to ignore it, or it uses magical space language to ignore Precision, but the fact is clear.

The terms used are -the same- and -verbatim-. And no other language suggests otherwise. You have a rule. No exception exists. Apply the damn rule.

It's -really- that straightforward.

Until then, look for the word 'automatic' in that feature and get back to me when it magically shows up.

 

[ObsidianCrane]

Therefore, given Holy Ardor is a specific rule (as defined by the fact that it pertain to a much narrower game subset) that conflicts with these, the rule of specific trumps general applies, and therefore the two rolls hit regardless of whether it would naturally have been a miss.

Only if you abandon the useage of the term "Critical Hit" as a term, and seperate it into its component parts. It also only works that way if you ignore the fact that Automatic Hit is seperate from Critical Hit.

The only specific way this power overrides the general is in the dice result required to obtain a critical hit - with this feature you can score it buy rolling the same result on 2 dice with your Oath of Enmity power not just on a 20.

 

[BobTheNob]

So after all of this, the general position is to interpret this to ensure the PP has a 2.25% crit increase (the smallest crit increase obtainable in the game) which diminishes with difficulty.

I havent seen one build in the build forums (gleemax) that actually uses an avenger PP. They all multiclass to something that gives them enhanced crit range (and thus a 10% minimum crit change increase!!!!). Its so cheeseball and predicatable, its practicaly depressing.

Now we have a PP for the avenger which is closer and actually offers something close to the same viability, and you would actually choose to deny it that last few percent...for what?

I guess this is what is frustrating me. Its so easy to interpret it either way, but people actually choose the lesser option for reasons of...actually, I dont even know how to guess at reasons. Leaves me a little baffled.

I like to think as DM that the decisions I make are for the better of the game, so I think I know how I will decide.

I thank you all for your time.

 

[DracoSuave]

So after all of this, the general position is to interpret this to ensure the PP has a 2.25% crit increase (the smallest crit increase obtainable in the game) which diminishes with difficulty.

I havent seen one build in the build forums (gleemax) that actually uses an avenger PP. They all multiclass to something that gives them enhanced crit range (and thus a 10% minimum crit change increase!!!!). Its so cheeseball and predicatable, its practicaly depressing.

Now we have a PP for the avenger which is closer and actually offers something close to the same viability, and you would actually choose to deny it that last few percent...for what?

I guess this is what is frustrating me. Its so easy to interpret it either way, but people actually choose the lesser option for reasons of...actually, I dont even know how to guess at reasons. Leaves me a little baffled.

I like to think as DM that the decisions I make are for the better of the game, so I think I know how I will decide.

I thank you all for your time.

Do understand, those critical hits aren't just critical hits. Those are critical hits that turn into other attacks that have a good chance to critical hit.

I'm not saying it's broken to make them automatically hit... but it's one of the few ways to get stackable Crit range on a character that already has stackable crit range.

So, start with Str 16, Dex 13, Wis 16, and Elf. You only need to increase your strength once and then take Demigod (or +2 Strength Epic Destiny of choice.) Heavy Blade Mastery is easily taken at this.

So.... let's see what the math is here for critical chance...

A little less than 23% of the time... and after each critical you get a free attack... with a 23% chance to crit. With a Fullblade.

Wow.

Compare to Daggervenger which is 28% of the time, but doesn't toss in free attacks just for critting. And is a 1d4 weapon. Not a 1d12 weapon with high crit... that can be Vorpal... and can HBO... Avenger+HBO? Nice.

An interesting comparison.

 

[BobTheNob]

Yea, them be pretty bad numbers long run (I actually went flail to preserve a little bit on strength and no extra feat required. Still does heaps at 30 by design, just not the full crit. I just keep rethinking it constantly

But put like that is is substnatial. I guess Im just a little peaved they couldnt do it in the paragon level

 

[Eldorian]

So after all of this, the general position is to interpret this to ensure the PP has a 2.25% crit increase (the smallest crit increase obtainable in the game) which diminishes with difficulty.

I havent seen one build in the build forums (gleemax) that actually uses an avenger PP. They all multiclass to something that gives them enhanced crit range (and thus a 10% minimum crit change increase!!!!). Its so cheeseball and predicatable, its practicaly depressing.

Now we have a PP for the avenger which is closer and actually offers something close to the same viability, and you would actually choose to deny it that last few percent...for what?

I guess this is what is frustrating me. Its so easy to interpret it either way, but people actually choose the lesser option for reasons of...actually, I dont even know how to guess at reasons. Leaves me a little baffled.

I like to think as DM that the decisions I make are for the better of the game, so I think I know how I will decide.

I thank you all for your time.

Dude, I'm not arguing because I want this paragon path to read what I read it as. I'm arguing because that's what it says.

The rule that is the exception is precision. It applies because this paragon path allows you to critical on rolls other than 20s.

Exception vs general works like this: if you have a rule that references another rule, that the rule that references is the exception.

Exception means that the rule specifies how things differ from what normally is possible. Normally, a 20 crits. Except, pairs crit if you have this paragon path. Except, only pairs that lead to a hit crit because of precision.

Precision references the paragon path's crits on rolls other than 20 which references critical hits being only on 20s. Follow the line of reference.

 

[DracoSuave]

Yea, them be pretty bad numbers long run (I actually went flail to preserve a little bit on strength and no extra feat required. Still does heaps at 30 by design, just not the full crit. I just keep rethinking it constantly

But put like that is is substnatial. I guess Im just a little peaved they couldnt do it in the paragon level

Well, yeah, but, you have the only Paragon Path so far that has better than 19-20 crit that isn't Daggermaster or action point-spendy.

I mean, it isn't 18-20, but second best is still second best.

Epic only blows it out of the water and into omgwtfbbq country.

And I'd rather having almost dagger master with a huge beatsword than daggervenger with a crappy little breadknife.

Originally I concepted it with a light blade build and then I realized 'Screw that, Dex isn't -that- pivotal that it must be the highest at level 1.' Granted, it needs Demigod/Strength Boosting Epic, but that's okay, this is a twink build.

Personally I'd dive into Eternal Defender...

1d12 highcrit becomes 2d6 reach 2 highcrit.

Assassin's point with a vicious dagger becomes a crit for (not counting static bonuses that don't affect comparison) 108+6d12+1d10 damage... or 115-190 damage + static mods... 152.5 crit. Not bad.

Let's see, 2d6 vorpal averages to...
Grr... let v = 1d6 vorpal, v = 15/6 + (v+6)/6... 6v = 15 + v + 6... 5v = 21... v = 4.2

2d6 = 8.4 average...

So Final Oath's crit with a large fullblade becomes 18(6)+6d12+6d6vorpal+1d10...

108+39+25.2+5.5...

....177.2 average critical.


So... the crits from this Critvenger at level 29 (assuming maximum power in the attack) is higher than the crits from the daggermaster. (I'm sorry, Brutal Scoundrel won't make up for 20 points of difference here.)

Wow. Average damage is also better for the avenger, because of vorpal and the larger number of dice involved.


Just. Wow.

 

[N8Ball]

The disagreement boils down to this:

Myself, Nifft and others think that the words "you score a critical hit" necessarilly means you hit.

Draco and others think the words "you score a critical hit" means you still might have missed.

Can we agree on that much?



How would you read it if the power said,
"When you roll doubles, you score a hit, except when you roll double ones"

 

[DracoSuave]

As a completely different animal... moot point tho.

...mainly because the rules template used for that would be 'When you roll doubles, you hit.' in its simplest form.

You don't score hits, as far as I am aware. You simply hit. The only scoring going on is with critical hits.

 

[N8Ball]

So you agree that the arrangement, "If you roll doubles, then X" means that X will apply regardless of that the normal rules for X are.

The normal rules for hitting say that you need to roll a hitting number AND precision says that only a 20 is an automatic hit.

So if "X" is "you hit", you've acknowledged that both of these general rules are overruled by the specific rule right?