Adent Champion. Rules lawyers required

[Artoomis]

...Nothing in the Critical Hit rules says you "score a hit and deal damage"...

Maybe not in those exact words, but I reiterate something I wrote that was after you quoted me:

Critical Hit is defined as a "Hit" for it is defined under the header, "Hit" on page 276. "Critical Hit" is one of three types of Hits. The first type is just a hit (with no sub-heading), the second type is an automatic hit, the third type is a critical hit.

Since Critical Hit is defined under the heading of "Hit," it is a "Hit."

Under Attack Results there are only two possible choices, Hit or Miss. Critical Hit is defined under Hit, not Miss. Therefore a Critical Hit is a Hit.

Good enough for you, yet?

 

[abyssaldeath]

Good enough for you, yet?

Nope it is not. 276 say that a critical hit is a roll of a natural 20 then it directs you to the critical hit rules. So unless we are talking about natural 20's page 276 has nothing to do with our argument. Determining whether or not Holy Ardor hits is entirely dependent on the critical hit rules on page 278.

 

[Donderafosti]

A critical hit does deal max damage, but if the attack roll result doesn't match the defense, you're gonna do max critical damage to something other than what you were aiming for, 'cus it missed...I'm just not sure why this is such a special case.

 

[Artoomis]

A critical hit does deal max damage, but if the attack roll result doesn't match the defense, you're gonna do max critical damage to something other than what you were aiming for, 'cus it missed...

That's just flat wrong. Holy Ardor aside, a potential critical hit where attack roll result doesn't match the defense is not a ciritical hit at all.

 

[N8Ball]

...there are numerous abilities that trigger on "scoring a critical hit" but make no mention whatsoever about hitting or missing.

Samir brought this up in a question about the feat Suprise Knockdown (PHB 201). If things really do work as you say, I haven't really heard a good reason yet why this wouldn't trigger if you can score a critical hit and miss.

I actually think I can answer this. One version is the declarative "you score a critical hit" and the other is conditional "IF you score a critical hit". The declarative is granting max damage to a given attack (which can be nullified by my above arguments about "Hit" and "Miss") and the other is the case where the outcome has already been determined meaning you either got the critical ("Hit") or you didn't ("Miss").

I'm not sure I follow you here. (keep in mind I'm trying to understand your position and it's implications)

If I got a critical hit using mastery or some other crit-range enhancing ability, why would I not trigger surprise knockdown regardless of a hit or miss?

If I've scored the crit, and that's the trigger explicitly stated by the feat, doesn't it go off independent of hitting?

 

[Artoomis]

Nope it is not. 276 say that a critical hit is a roll of a natural 20 then it directs you to the critical hit rules. So unless we are talking about natural 20's page 276 has nothing to do with our argument. Determining whether or not Holy Ardor hits is entirely dependent on the critical hit rules on page 278.

Page 276 defines what a critical hit really is. It's clearly a special hit where you deal maximum damage. That's from page 276. Note that Page 276 says that when you roll a natural 20 you might get a critical hit, but that does not exclude other ways to get a critical hit.

In fact, page 278 tells you you might get a critical hit on rolls other than 20, as defined in some powers, and tells you how to determine if a potential critical hit (defined on page 276) turns out to actually be one or not.

Since Critical Hit is defined as a Hit vs. a Miss, well then, it must be a Hit, right? How can it not be a hit when all attack results are defined as hits or misses and a critical hit is defined under "hit" and not "miss??" Can you explain that?

 

[abyssaldeath]

Page 276 defines what a critical hit really is. It's clearly a special hit where you deal maximum damage. That's from page 276. Note that Page 276 says that when you roll a natural 20 you might get a critical hit, but that does not exclude other ways to get a critical hit.

In fact, page 278 tells you you might get a critical hit on rolls other than 20, as defined in some powers, and tells you how to determine if a potential critical hit (defined on page 276) turns out to actually be one or not.

Since Critical Hit is defined as a Hit vs. a Miss, well then, it must be a Hit, right? How can it not be a hit when all attack results are defined as hits or misses and a critical hit is defined under "hit" and not "miss??" Can you explain that?

Yes, but since critical hit is indented after the hit rules you clearly have to roll equal to or higher then the targets defenses to get that crit. In no way does 276 tell you that you can hit because you crit'd. In fact it tells you that you can crit because you hit. You have to hit first before you ever get to crit. If you do not hit first it doesn't matter what you roll.

 

[Donderafosti]

So, uh, pitcher chucks a fastball at you and you REALLY get behind it, you crit the out of it, in fact, you hit the ball so hard it blows up....did you score a home run?

I'd like to hear your take on this Arty =)

 

[Artoomis]

Yes, but since critical hit is indented after the hit rules you clearly have to roll equal to or higher then the targets defenses to get that crit. In no way does 276 tell you that you can hit because you crit'd. In fact it tells you that you can crit because you hit. You have to hit first before you ever get to crit. If you do not hit first it doesn't matter what you roll.

True enough. I am not arguing with that at all. That's the normal case.

However, if one is able to "score a critical hit" without also scoring the minimum number for a regular hit, then, because of the way critical hit is defined as a "hit" (rather than a "miss," the only other choice) you have indeed hit and do maximum damage to your target.

I maintain that since Holy Ardor lets you "score a critical hit" on doubles, you get maximum damage to your target (and whatever else happens from your critical hit).

I can accept an argument that Precision applies - I don't agree with as I don't think Precision is even a rule but just a re-statement of some rules, but can accept it. This argument essentially says that "score a critical hit" really means "potentially score a critical hit."

I cannot accept an argument that say you can score a critical hit and yet not hit. That's counter to the definition of critical hit. It is simply not possible, per the definition of critical hit, to score a critical hit and yet not hit your target and damage it.

 

[abyssaldeath]

True enough. I am not arguing with that at all. That's the normal case.

However, if one is able to "score a critical hit" without also scoring the minimum number for a regular hit, then, because of the way critical hit is defined as a "hit" (rather than a "miss," the only other choice) you have indeed hit and do maximum damage to your target.

I maintain that since Holy Ardor lets you "score a critical hit" on doubles, you get maximum damage to your target (and whatever else happens from your critical hit).

I can accept an argument that Precision applies - I don't agree with as I don't think Precision is even a rule but just a re-statement of some rules, but can accept it. This argument essentially says that "score a critical hit" really means "potentially score a critical hit."

I cannot accept an argument that say you can score a critical hit and yet not hit. That's counter to the definition of critical hit. It is simply not possible, per the definition of critical hit, to score a critical hit and yet not hit your target and damage it.

So what you are really saying is that you are ok with completely bypassing the hit rules because you don't like the terminology involved.