Search results

And I have shown the term "critical hit" to be encompased by "hit" through examples and direct quotes from the book. (and it makes sense) As I explained, "automatic hit" is a sometimes-coincident result with critical hit, and NEVER a criteria for it. Looking for that wording is would be the...

OK, here goes. Assumptions: (at least the most contentious ones) - A Critical hit is a hit that does max damage (and extras) - The permissive or definitive language used in the rules, feats and features surrounding Critical hits is meaningful and deliberate. This is what I think precision...

Well that just makes it 1 cust serv for and 1 cust serv against. Big surprise. See the first post by Gearjammer on page 4.

This is for sure one way to GET a crit, but once you get there, what is it? It's a maximum damage hit. (sometimes with extras as applied by the crit rules and other features that do whatever "when you score a critical hit".) OK, now we're getting somewhere. I would submit that what we mean...

Without agreeing on what a crit is, any situation I provide involving crits will have different underlying assumptions by each of us, and I don't think will get us anywhere. But I will talk about Automatic hits here in a minute.

That understanding is only possible if you define a crit as a possible miss, which doesn't agree with the three quotes I referenced. The definition of a crit is consistent within the basic rules (those examples), The feats and features in question only change how you get there, not what it IS...

First of all "score a critical hit" = "crit" = "critical hit". Pg 278 is explicit about that much. The understanding of what a critical hit is must also allow for a distinction between permissive language when determining crits, as is used on page 276: ** This allowance is what makes it...

Absolutely true. Specific unusual circumstances can change the basic rules. everyone agrees with that. Artoomis makes a good point here though. The rules have the requirement of a successful attack roll before you score a critical hit. Requiring that "scoring a critical hit" again checks to...

We can't very well have a useful argument unless we agree on the terms we're using. That's why I'm stuck on defining the terms, because they're so central to everything about the discussion. Very well, so we'll define X as "scoring a critical hit" instead. And you believe that "scoring a...

Actually, no. I agree with that statement wholeheartedly. I was hesitating to post this agreement because I'm relatively sure that somebody is going to rage all over me tell me how this can't jive with my own arguments rather than actually listen to my argument to it's conclusion as see if it...

So you define "critical hit" as a situation that requires other tests (successful attack roll) to determine the outcome (max damage or miss), right? It seems that that is functionally identical to calling "Critical hit" the function X which includes the precision rules within it, since every...

I follow your logic and I happen to agree with it, but they won't because you've made assumptions that they disagree with.... Specificly, the definition of Critical hit. You define it as a max damage hit, they define it similarly but include the possibility of a miss. The end of any argument...

I disagree. The question about whether doubles = "numbers other than 20" is a question that pertains to the argument, but it's far less foundational than our disagreement on what a critical hit is. I may argue your position in the future, but right now I'm just trying to pin down what each of...

We must find some common ground if we are to make any progress. If one side argues logic while another argues semantics we'll get nowhere. Heck, even arguing semantics versus semantics only got us 6 pages of repeating the same arguments. Logic is a bit less subjective and I think may help...

It is only that simple if I make the same assumptions that you do about the definition of "critical hit", but I'm not, so it isn't. More importantly, you've mixed arguments between your logical equasions and what you wrote below them. The logical equasion wasn't finished because it didn't...

The logical equasion I gave describes the text of Holy Ardor concisely and accurately. It needs no addition. If you would like to argue that X has logical arguments (F) within it, then that may be consistent with your argument, but X IS the result of meeting Holy Ardor's conditions. Saying...

No, that's not exactly right. The original equasion is the form of the PHB wording; Holy Ardor has significant differences. Let's keep A as "roll a 20". You could think of the mastery feats changing this to "roll a 19 or 20". Holy Ardor reads likes this if you wanted to put it in logical...

Yeah, decimate is something a roman commander did to his OWN troops when they lost a battle. It helped to keep their motivation high..... We made a joke like this when I was in the navy.... "The beatings will continue until morale improves!"

How can that be? Precision was put out MORE THAN A YEAR before Holy Ardor. At best, precision mentions that there may be some exceptions to the normal critical hit criteria but doesn't refer to any of them specifically and it certainly didn't refer to any that didn't exist yet. If anything...

Here are a couple definitions that I think are tripping some of us up. General rules: Adventuring and Combat sections of the PHB and DMG (and small bits in other books) This is how the game normally runs. How attacks are made, how movement and conditions are handled, actions types and when you...