Search results

This is the problem Artoomis. Imagine this math problem: x = 1 + 2 * 3 I hope we can agree that x = 7 based on order of operations. You are suggesting that with Holy Ardor you can suddenly change the order of operations because you rolled doubles and you have an ability that says "if you...

This ignores "Compare your attack roll to your target's defense (see page 274 to see how this is accomplished) and (without the books in front of me mind you) I'm pretty sure that p276 with the automatic hit rules are included in that resolution. You are correct....there is no reason why a new...

Note the use of the exact same terminology? Perhaps you missed where the outcome of OoE is an attack roll. Your flawed logic: Holy Ardor does not grant an attack roll of any kind (we agree). Therefore you cannot use Holy Ardor in the resolution of step 3 because it isn't an attack roll...

I guess maybe I missed the mark on the question I asked. What I am trying to get at is how would you word the critical hit rules such that they apply to ALL critical hits without having to mention specific exceptional mechanics such as a critical being granted by Holy Ardor on doubles AND any...

In this case I ask again. Let's assume for a moment that Holy Ardor does NOT create a new mechanic. How would you reword Precision so it applies to Holy Ardor AND any other granted critical hit other than natural 20? I want to know what you think about Precision doesn't apply.

You are completely ignoring the context of these two rules. One absolutely must be definitive in that it is inside the body of the actual critical hit rules. The other is a power granting a critical hit that must still meet any requirements that were not overridden in the power granting the...

In this case I have an intellectual exercise for those who said Precision does not apply to Holy Ardor. Given: For any "Critical Hit" being granted there are only two outcomes possible in the Critical Hit rules. 1. Natural 20 2. All other results (including the reference back to the Hit rules...

So in the case of Holy Ardor, Precision does matter? Or is this a more general case that Precision is needed for other cases and my case for Holy Ardor is correct in that Precision essentially has no effect. I'm not quite clear what you're trying to get across.

Precision is a reminder of the rules for "Hit" found on p276. But even more important than that is this: What I said was "...in this case Precision doesn't even matter" which is not the same as it doesn't apply. If you roll doubles in step 3 and that roll is not good enough to beat the...

You need to read pages 19+ which covers some new ground and pretty much proves that "Critical Hit" does not grant a "Hit" and that in this case Precision doesn't even matter.

No matter what I prefer to see the specific exception. How about: If you use Oath of Enmity and roll doubles, you hit - even if your roll does not beat the defense of the target, unless you get double ones. This text overrides the denial text you are looking to ignore. I am curious though, if...

One last comment then off to bed. I now realize N8Ball that you may have been asking about the 2 quotes at the bottom of my post. My comment above them may lead you to believe they are rules text, but they are not. I was pointing out that I got very close to the actual rules text back on page...

Ok...now you have me wondering. Are you talking about the actual act of you the player looking at the dice and seeing...gee I got 5 and 5 "DOUBLES" or the step in the procedure where it matters if you got doubles or not?

You were asking about powers that trigger if you "score a critical hit" and how would that work under my reading of the rules where you could "crit" and "miss" at the same time. EDIT: Oh and because if you miss (step 4) you won't deal max damage (step 5). I suppose you could put it after step...

Since we don't like the hit rules let's go back even further. I know already what you're going to say....Holy Ardor says you "score a critical hit" so go straight to apply maximum damage so consider it said already and don't trot it out again. Page 269 Making an attack This is an ordered list...

I need to clarify that this information is incorrect. Critical hit is NOT defined on page 276. It IS defined on p278. References on p276 only talk about when you might score a critical and restate the max damage clause from p278. Critical Hit is defined as max damage and a few other things...

Let me start with some of the base assumptions (and I know you're trying to understand my position so I won't try to defend each point): 1. Every attack has 2 components to the result. 1a. Did I hit? ("Hit" "Miss") p276 1b. Did I critical? p278 This gives you a matrix outcome of (sorry I can't...

There is no basis in the rules for this assumption. Nothing in the Critical Hit rules says you "score a hit and deal damage". That is completely under the control of the "Hit" rules. As soon as you hit the word "ergo" you are now assuming and have lost your argument. I'm not going to let you...

Actually...no it doesn't. And if it does somewhere I want that in black and white with a page number to reference because I wasn't able to find any such thing. Again I refer to my post on the previous page where I quoted the entire "Critical Hit" rules. Nowhere in said rules does it say that...

The problem is that your opinion doesn't matter. What matters is the rules text.