Vorpal Uber Weapons?!?

[Trebor62]

the RAW is correct. To say that it means the maximum damage as opposed to RAW max die would have the vorpal power kick in for much less often for the Falcion or other 2d? weapons as opposed to 1d? weapons. The exact probably would be 1/?^2 verses 1/? respectively where ? is the damage die. And the multiple [w] powers would make the vorpal power engaging a rare event if applied to the whole damage roll.

 

[Hypersmurf]

the RAW is correct.

By definition.

To say that it means the maximum damage as opposed to RAW max die...

I'm not saying it means maximum damage. I'm saying it means maximum damage on a given damage die, and that for a falchion, each damage die is 2d4.

-Hyp.

 

[Trebor62]

I understand what you are saying. What you are saying is the vorpal power would function 1 in 16 times for the falchion, as opposed to 1 in 8 times for say a long sword. By your interpertation the vorpal power would engage twice as often for the long sword as it would for the falchion even though the there is little difference in the average damage. falchion average vorpal damage 13, longsword 12.5 for 2d4 verses 1d8. I am ignoring vorpal damage on vorpal damage as this would just favor the long sword and would occur 1 in 256 for the falchion and 1 in 64 for the longsword.

 

[Klaus]

So let me get this straight I just rolled 7 on a weapon that does 2-8 pts damage. And somehow I get to roll another d4 due to it being vorpal. You guys can't be serious? That comes off as so cheesy it's not even funny. As this been FAQed somewhere because I would laugh any player off my table without seeing it in writing.

If you're looking for numbers see post #39

A vorpal is, at minimum, a +6 weapon.

A +6 vorpal glaive deals 2d4+6+Str modifier damage on a basic attack. On a critical hit, it deals 8+6+6d12+Str modifier.

If you attack with a vorpal using, say, Brute Strike (Level 29 Fighter exploit, 7[W]+Str damage), you'll be rolling 14d4+6+Str modifier damage. If any of those d4 come up "4", you add them and reroll them, and keep rerolling and adding as long as they turn up "4".

So you roll 14d4+6+Str. 1 in 4 of those d4 should come up "4", so you'll be rolling around 3 extra d4, maybe 4. And if it is a critical hit, you'll deal 56+6+Str+6d12.

 

[Hypersmurf]

By your interpertation the vorpal power would engage twice as often for the long sword as it would for the falchion even though the there is little difference in the average damage.

Right.

By yours, the vorpal power engages four times as often for the falchion as it would for the longsword even though there is little difference in the average damage.

Conclusion? Comparing average damage is not helpful when determining how often the vorpal power 'should' come into play with 2dx weapons.

Which is why I look, instead, at what the damage die of the falchion is, since rolling the maximum on the damage die is the trigger.

-Hyp.

 

[jaelis]

If I'm using a Vorpal Falchion, and I make a list of each damage die that makes up my damage roll, does the damage die of the falchion not appear on that list one or more times?

Sure. But yet, each d4 that you roll is a damage die as well, and could thus also be entered in that list.

 

[Trebor62]

No RAW it is twice as often 1 in 4 for 2d4 versus 1 in 8 for 1d8, but the d4 bonus is only ~55% that of d8 bonus. The average damage is what needs to be compared because it represents the frequency times the effect. The frequency cannot meaningfully be considered in isolation of the damage rendered, because it is the damage that has the game effect.

Also how would you treat the critical d12's? Would all 6 need to be a 12 (~1 in 3 million chance) or would they be treated individally? RAW they would be considered individually.

 

[DracoSuave]

Where Hyp goes wrong is quoting the example as gospel but ignoring the rule the example comes from.

The rule itself mentions dice plural for what plugs into [W], and the rule -itself- is not ambivalent in that regard.

Weapon Damage Dice: A [W] in a damage expression stands for your weapon’s damage dice. (The weapon tables on pages 218–219 show damage dice for all weapons.) The number before the [W] indicates the number of times you roll your weapon dice. If a power’s damage is “2[W] + Strength modifier” and you use a dagger (1d4 damage), roll 2d4, then add your Strength modifier. If you use a heavy flail (2d6 damage) with the same power, roll 4d6, then add your Strength modifier.


So, according to Hyp's logic, the heavy flail -clearly- does 'damage dice' while the falchion's 2d4 is a singular damage die, because the example mentions heavy flail using the term in a plurality, and the falchion in a term in singularity.

Also, 1d4 is obviously damage dice -plural- so you can only reroll part of it when that part comes up maxed, if vorpal. (assuming daggers could be vorpal)


Common sense, logic, elegance, and everything else seem to point against plural dice being a singular damage 'die', and if that -were- the case....

.... you'd think they might lay it out explicitly somewhere hmmmmmm?!?

 

[Hypersmurf]

No RAW it is twice as often 1 in 4 for 2d4 versus 1 in 8 for 1d8...

Hmm? Of the 16 possible combinations on 2d4, seven of them involve a 4, and one of those involves two 4s.

So if you roll a d8 sixteen times, you can expect to roll two 8s. If you roll 2d4 sixteen times, you can expect to roll eight 4s. You roll a 4 four times as often as you roll an 8.

Also how would you treat the critical d12's? Would all 6 need to be a 12 (~1 in 3 million chance) or would they be treated individally? RAW they would be considered individually.

Certainly. You roll one critical die per point of enhancement bonus. There are six of them. Each d12 can trigger a reroll.

You roll your weapon damage die once per [W]. The damage die of a falchion is 2d4. Each 2d4 can trigger a reroll.

The rule itself mentions dice plural for what plugs into [W], and the rule -itself- is not ambivalent in that regard.

Weapon Damage Dice: A [W] in a damage expression stands for your weapon’s damage dice.

I'd say the definition of Weapon Damage Die comes from p219, rather than p276, given that it's the Weapons page.

Damage: The weapon's damage gie. When a power deals a number of weapon damage dice (such as 4[W], you roll the number of dice indicated by this entry. If the weapon's damage die is an expression of multiple dice, roll that number of dice the indicated number of times. For example, a falchion (which has a damage die of 2d4) deals 8d4 damage when used with a power that deals 4[W] on a hit.

This seems to use the terms very consistently. "Damage die" refers to what appears in the column on the table, whether it's 1d8 or 2d4. "Number of weapon damage dice" refers to a plural of [W], not a plural of dX. "Multiple dice" refers to more than one polyhedron.

So the 'damage die' can refer to one physical die, or to multiple physical dice. There's no inconsistency of terminology on p219.

As you yourself point out, p276 is internally inconsistent. It refers to a single [W] as damage dice, yet we know that a single [W] can be singular in both concept and physical representation (1d8, for example, is one [W] and one polyhedron), so using the plural makes no sense. When p276 says "A [W] in a damage expression stands for your weapon's damage dice", it is misquoting p219.

-Hyp.

 

[DracoSuave]

Actually, hyp... you missed the fact that those inconsistancies only result when applying your logic to them.

The implication being that the problem is not what is read, but your logic.