Does anyone else think this is a bug in CB?

[CovertOps]

Settings:

• Caster of some kind (Sorcerer, Wizard)
• "Intrinsic" option set on
• Dual Implement Spellcaster (feat)
• 2 non-magic daggers equipped
• Level 4 to be sure you have the +1 "Intrinsic" weapon enhancement bonus
• Pick an at-will power then look at it's damage breakdown

At this point you notice that there is no entry for "+1 Off-hand enhancement bonus". I submitted this bug report, but got back:

Unfortunately, there isn’t an official answer for the situation you describe. I’ve passed along this conversation to the game’s developers. Hopefully, we’ll see an update or FAQ entry covering it soon, but until then it’s up to the campaign’s Dungeon Master to decide. The DM is always the final arbiter on how they want their campaign to run. Have fun!

I also submitted another CB bug:

This problem can be seen as early as 3rd level:
1. Build a 3rd level sorcerer and be sure to have a 13 Con, 13 Dex
2. Take Tempest Magic
3. Take Dancing Lightning (encounter 3)
4. Take Thunder Slam (encounter 1)
5. Open the character sheet and on the card for "Dancing Lightning" in the "Additional Effects" section it will say "+2 to damage rolls when bloodied - Tempest magic." On the card for "Thunder Slam" in the "Additional Effects" section it will say "+1 to damage rolls when bloodied - Tempest Magic." The difference between the two powers is that one has both the Thunder AND Lightning keywords and the other has only Thunder.

In my opinion since the +1 base damage from Tempest magic is included already in the XdY + Z (specifically the Z part) then the "Additional Effects" should correctly say "+1 to damage rolls while bloodied - Tempest Magic" indicating the EXTRA damage you get to apply (2 - 1 = 1)

This is how I updated the report this morning after they said "nothing is wrong" to my original (only slightly less) descriptive bug report.

I'm getting the feeling that customer service is handling their software bug reports like game rules questions which is doing a disservice to the development team. Thoughts?

 

[CovertOps]

So is that too much free time because I submitted a bug to CS or is it too much free time because I found the bug in the first place helping a friend make their character for my game where I use the "Intrinsic" option?

 

[circadianwolf]

If you're using intrinsic bonuses, DIS shouldn't be a legal feat, because it doesn't have any effect. That's what the campaign settings tab is for.

CB has a lot more relevant bugs than this.

 

[Aegeri]

This isn't a bug, you don't have two magical implements and so it doesn't work. Intrinsic bonuses do not make your weapons magical.

 

[CovertOps]

If you're using intrinsic bonuses, DIS shouldn't be a legal feat, because it doesn't have any effect. That's what the campaign settings tab is for.

CB has a lot more relevant bugs than this.

You'll have to forgive me because I don't own a copy of DMG2. Why should a game option invalidate a feat? This seems like a nerf to certain classes based on preferred style. My understanding was that "Intrinsic" was supposed to get rid of the need for magic items (if that's what you wanted), not break game elements.

 

[Oldtimer]

You'll have to forgive me because I don't own a copy of DMG2. Why should a game option invalidate a feat? This seems like a nerf to certain classes based on preferred style. My understanding was that "Intrinsic" was supposed to get rid of the need for magic items (if that's what you wanted), not break game elements.

But it does. We recently switched over to intrinsic bonuses in my campaign and the party warlock noticed this as he was scouring rule books for a new feat for level 10.

Since your implements no longer have an enhancement bonus, that feat is basically useless.

 

[CovertOps]

One other question....so how does that work with Rangers wielding two weapons? Does their off hand attack not get the "Intrinsic" bonus either? So a level 30 Ranger wielding two non-magical weapons using twin strike would have one attack at normal and the other and -6 to hit/damage?

 

[Oldtimer]

One other question....so how does that work with Rangers wielding two weapons? Does their off hand attack not get the "Intrinsic" bonus either? So a level 30 Ranger wielding two non-magical weapons using twin strike would have one attack at normal and the other and -6 to hit/damage?

Why do you think that? On each attack roll you add the intrinsic bonus. On each damage roll you add the intrinsic bonus. Why would he not get that with his off-hand attack?

 

[CovertOps]

But it does. We recently switched over to intrinsic bonuses in my campaign and the party warlock noticed this as he was scouring rule books for a new feat for level 10.

Since your implements no longer have an enhancement bonus, that feat is basically useless.

When it displays the damage breakdown of your power it lists quite clearly "+x Enhancement bonus - Inherent Bonuses" for main hand items. So an enhancement bonus isn't an enhancement bonus?

 

[Aegeri]

One other question....so how does that work with Rangers wielding two weapons? Does their off hand attack not get the "Intrinsic" bonus either? So a level 30 Ranger wielding two non-magical weapons using twin strike would have one attack at normal and the other and -6 to hit/damage?

You should examine the text of the feat you are talking about. It specifically says MAGICAL implements, something that twin strike does not stipulate. The reason it isn't adding anything is because intrinsic bonuses do not make your weapons magical in any form.

Edit: Intrinsic bonuses are enhancement bonuses so they do not stack with magical item enhancement bonuses. It's an exclusive either or system as a result. Once again, examine the TEXT of the feat you are talking about, you need to be wielding TWO magical implements for it to work. Intrinsic bonuses, do not make normal weapons magical.