Search results

You case, the is based upon a logical fallacy. Why? Because if you score a critical hit, you are done and you apply the critical hit damage. I guess what you are really saying is that you get a potential critical hit. By definition, if you "score a critical hit" you get to apply the critical...

You could be right. And so could I. Precision is in the context of making an attack roll (as is the whole critical hit section). Therefore its context is making an attack roll. Using the result of two attacks rolls as a pair (doubles) is an entirely new situation and has its own rule - it...

Fair enough. But Precision is in the context of rolling a number and attempting to score a critical hit. This is distinguished from Holy Ardor in two ways 1. Holy Ardor gives an entirely new rule for "score a critical hit." The omission of "can," which, given the many other uses of the...

There is no circular argument. I'll demonstrate with an example: Whenever you make two attack rolls because of your oath of enmity, you score a hit if both dice have the same roll, except if both rolls are 1.: Same rule as Holy Ardor,, but with "hit" instead of "critical hit." This would...

This is where you get it wrong. The "normal" critical hit rules tells you what it takes to "score a critical hit." This feature changes that and gives a new mechanic for how to "score a critical hit." It creates an exception to the "normal" critical hit rules. It's really that simple.

Not just that (though that's pretty big, given that they use the word "can" in every other place that modifies the critical hit rules), but also the new mechanic of rolling doubles. That, and the mention of rolling ones being an exception. I think its more than a coincidence that the new...

Ah, but it does. Roll doubles and "score a critical hit." It's difficult to be more definitive than that, given that "score a critical hit" is a defined game term - defined in the critical hit rules. We just neatly avoided the whole "attack roll needs to meet the targeted defense" thing. The...

There are two ways to look at this, and, until WotC formally weighs in on this (by a FAQ entry or a rules update) both are correct in that they are defensible by RAW: 1. The more conservative approach is to say that Holy Ardor simply creates a new way to score a potential critical hit, but...

Indeed I have. I shall do it again, just follow the bold text below: Natural 20: If you roll a 20 on the die when making an attack roll, you score a critical hit if your total attack roll is high enough to hit your target’s defense. If your attack roll is too low to score a critical hit, you...

I did show this, by quoting the Critical Hit rules and not being able to find any exception to where "you score a critical hit" means anything other than actually getting the critical hit - meaning you get to apply the critical damage. Note that a different phrase, "you can score a critical...

Yes, it is true that the rolls on the two dice are numbers. However, it is also that all other rules (other than Holy Ardor) are in the context of rolling a number (sometimes picking the best or worst of mutiple rolls) on a d20. Holy Ardor creates an entirely new situation of using a...

I think we are now focusing on the right issue. When rolling two 2s what have you got? 1. Two attack rolls, neither of which hit. 2. Doubles, which Holy Ardor says "score a critical hit." So now what? Either "score as critical hit" means what it says and you get to score a critical hit...

Well, maybe, maybe not. Let's review that very point, because it is pretty core to our discussion: The rules, in there entirety, on when you "score a critical hit" are: Natural 20: If you roll a 20 on the die when making an attack roll, you score a critical hit if your total attack roll is...

The lack of the word "can it very important, but, truly, even more important is the new mechanic of rolling doubles. This is, arguably, not the same as when one uses the result of a single die (or highest roll, which is the same thing, really). Thus one can argue that the new rule, Holy Ardor...

I don't need a reason, just the fact that WotC created this brand new scenario when they created Holy Ardor. Whether I agree with it or not, or understand why they did this or not, is not the point. I am just looking at what's published and trying to determine what it means.

Oh my... I just realized that the terminology used on Holy Ardor is not ambiguous as i thought. "Ardent Champion: "Holy Ardor (11th level): Whenever you make two attack rolls because of your oath of enmity, you score a critical hit if both dice have the same roll, except if both rolls are 1.""...

I hate to get picky over terminology, especially when I don't think it matters to the point that my learned opposition is making, but: "Score a critical hit" is when you have passed whatever tests exist and actually get to do the critical damage. Per the Rules Compendium: "Natural 20: If you...

BTW, I have submitted the following to CustServ: There has been much discussion around the Arden Champion's Holy Ardor power which reads: Holy Ardor (11th level): Whenever you make two attack rolls because of your oath of enmity, you score a critical hit if both dice have the same roll, except...

But you won't really get there, I think, without answering the question of whether double = number other than 20 or not., For we know, as re-stated for the rules compendium, exactly what a critical hit is, without regard to Holy Ardor: "Natural 20: If you roll a 20 on the die when making an...

I am sorry, I could not follow this or undertsand your point. Could you re-state this another way?