D&D 4E 4E updates/errata posted today 1/20/2009

[Mithreinmaethor]

Actually I think that Milestones should only be gained thru combat or a skill challenge vs a trap etc. Giving out a milestone for completing 2 social skill challenges is just plain silly.

 

[Caliban]

Problem is, it doesn't say that it does, it merely says that you may add the extra damage. Warlock's Curse itself prevents that extra damage being used more than once per round. Without something to counteract that restriction, the Pact Hammer would do nothing except permit you to do something you already were allowed to do.

The propert says: "When you hit a target affected by your warlocks curse with this weapon, you deal your extra curse damage agains that targt."

To me, that would not have the once per round limitation (specific rule overriding general rule). Which is probably why they removed it.

In any case, it's a moot point. It's gone no matter how you interpret it.

 

[Nail]

Actually I think that Milestones should only be gained thru combat or a skill challenge vs a trap etc. Giving out a milestone for completing 2 social skill challenges is just plain silly.

Thread derail:

I disagree. If the PCs have overcome a challenge, they get XP.....right? Social skill challenges only differ from physical skill challenges (like disarming a trap) in the skill sthat are used, nothing more. Given that, I see no reason why reaching a milestone after 2 social skill challenges is "just-plain-silly".

If there are two challenges, PCs should (usually) reach a milestone.

 

[Henrix]

It seems the errata for the DM's Screen needs an errata - it no longer corrects the p.42 table.

 

[DracoSuave]

The propert says: "When you hit a target affected by your warlocks curse with this weapon, you deal your extra curse damage agains that targt."

To me, that would not have the once per round limitation (specific rule overriding general rule). Which is probably why they removed it.

A specific rule needs to be specific. For example, a specific rule might say 'This attack does not provoke opportunity attacks' on a ranged attack. That is a -specific- rule. They are explicit, and are mentioned in a straightforward way.

There's no text on Pact Hammer that says 'This damage can be applied even if you've already applied curse damage this turn' or even implies it. Therefore, there's no specific rule, so you apply the general rule, which is 'once per turn.'

Specific vs. General does not mean you get to invent specific rules where they do not exist.

I contacted CS about it, and they forwarded it to the devs, and this is what resulted.

 

[Caliban]

A specific rule needs to be specific. For example, a specific rule might say 'This attack does not provoke opportunity attacks' on a ranged attack. That is a -specific- rule. They are explicit, and are mentioned in a straightforward way.

I really don't care. It's gone. But keep argueing about a property that's been removed from the game if it makes you feel better.

 

[Aexalon]

Interesting. The core books errata is included in the current pdfs (and probably in the Deluxe books - could someone confirm?)

Consider it confirmed. If you need proof (and some seem to do), see post #8 in this thread.