Adent Champion. Rules lawyers required

[DracoSuave]

Saying that one can "score a critical hit" and yet not hit and do damage is beyond silly.

Again, you've assumed the critical must be successful before applying rules showing that it might not be. And that assumption you then use to say those rules could not apply.

Abilities that say you do something do not guarantee that something is done.

That's all the rebuttal that is needed. You cannot use that non-existant guarantee to say that rules that -exist specificly to tell you what you want to happen does not happen- cannot apply.

-That- is as ludicrous as saying the Move action is more specific than the general rule of being Immobilized.

 

[ObsidianCrane]

But that only refers to critting on a natural 20. It is not inherent in critting *in general*. Note that the algorithm for applying criticals does not (or at least I noticed it didn't the last time I looked at it, but I could have missed it, AFB) reference running the "hit" line.

What is the Precision rule - chopped liver?

Critical Hits are subset of Hit, that is how the rules are structured, they are also structured so that if your result might be a Critical (Natural 20 or Precision) you still might Miss and thus not get a Critical Hit. But all actual Crits are actual Hits, without some sort of special rule to say the normal Crit rules (including Precision) do not apply.

The only way Holy Ardor gets a Crit without a Hit is if the Precision rules do not apply, and the only way for that to happen is for Holy Ardor to create Artoomis' "new rule", which I do not believe it does as that ignores the fundamental nature of what is happening - rolling an attack roll.

 

[CovertOps]

Number (3) is the crucial one, for if it truly is a hit, then (1) and (2) simply don't matter as the rule just overrode the rest of the hit rules. If a rule creates a new exception that says you hit, well, then, you hit.

So, if you "score a critical hit" have you hit? Well, let's see:

Page 276 Makes that clear:

Attack Results:
Hit....
...Automatic Hit
...Critical Hit
Miss...
...Automatic Miss

From this we see that the following are the only possible results for an attack:

1. Hit.
2. An automatic hit.
3. A critical hit
4. Miss
5. Automatic Miss

1, 2 and 3 all are hits.

Further, page 276 also say "A critical hit deals maximum damage..."

Critical hit only means you get to maximize any damage you do. If you don't hit and therefore don't do any damage you have nothing to maximize. And quit pointing to p276. Those are the "Attack Results" rules NOT the "Critical Hit" rules. Quit attempting to use the "Attack Results" rules to prove that your "Critical Hit" is a "Hit". I quite clearly said "Show where the "Critical Hit" rules PAGE 278 give you a "Hit".

If the attack roll is higher than or equal to the defense score, the attack hits and deals damage, has a special effect, or both.

Automatic Hit: If you roll a natural 20 (the die shows a 20), your attack automatically hits.

Critical Hit: If you roll a natural 20 (the die shows a 20), your attack might be a critical hit. A critical hit deals maximum damage, and some powers and magic items have an extra effect on a critical hit.

I'd also like to ask...what makes you think you get to ignore the requirements (the very first line) of "Attack Results", but unfortunately I already know the false answer you're going to give so I won't bother.

The number of assumptions and holes in your position are staggering. It's really amazing how much of the rules you get to just ignore or twist to mean something different to "prove" you are right. My position is pretty simple..."score a critical hit" says you qualify to apply "Critical Hit Damage" as shown in the rules on (amazingly) "Critical Hits" on p278. To phrase it differently a critical hit is not a special type of hit, it is a specific override to the general "Damage" rules found on p276. If you don't do any damage then a "Critical Hit" doesn't do anything. If your attack roll grants you a result that does damage you get to do maximum damage. Holy Ardor only applies within step 5 (Apply Damage) of the attack resolution. A critical hit is part of the "Apply Damage" rules as I have already proven and to keep trying to claim they are something different is just false.

Saying that one can "score a critical hit" and yet not hit and do damage is beyond silly.

This has already been proven to be possible so any claim about how silly it is just smacks of dis ingenuousness. Also this is your position only because of the missing (and unneeded) word "can". Rules don't need permission to apply to a given situation. They either apply or some specific rule gives you an override. You have created a 3rd state where some rules simply don't apply at all without an override - this is never the case.

 

[CovertOps]

One more thought Artoomis.

In your intrepritation you are invoking Holy Ardor in step 4 (Compare your attack roll...) and yet maintain that Holy Ardor is "not an attack roll". You then try to use this (Holy Ardor) that grants you a critical hit (see step 5 - apply damage) to prove that you don't need to "Compare your attack roll".

What if I tried to perform an OA on my turn. Does that work?
What if I tried to perform a move action when it isn't my turn. Does that work?
What if I tried to use Weapon Focus during "Compare your attack roll..." Does that work?

You are trying to use an ability (Holy Ardor) on an action (Compare your attack roll) to which it doesn't even apply according to your own argument. Your words. Your position.


This is essentially your process:
You are skipping step 4 entirely (Compare your attack roll) going to step 5 (apply damage), invoking Holy Ardor and then using the granted "Critical Hit" to prove that you were allowed to skip step 4 in the first place. You have put the proverbial cart in front of the Horse and that my friend IS circular logic.

 

[Artoomis]

Critical hit only means you get to maximize any damage you do. If you don't hit and therefore don't do any damage you have nothing to maximize. And quit pointing to p276. Those are the "Attack Results" rules NOT the "Critical Hit" rules. Quit attempting to use the "Attack Results" rules to prove that your "Critical Hit" is a "Hit". I quite clearly said "Show where the "Critical Hit" rules PAGE 278 give you a "Hit"...

There is no need to look to page 278 for that. Page 276 DEFINES Critical Hit as one of the possible results of Hit or Miss. Since it is one of the possible HIT results, if you "score a critical hit" you hit."

Bottom line:

If you "score a critical hit" you have hit. There is just no way around it - that's they it is defined.

It's beyond ludicrous to think you can have actually scored a critical hit and yet missed.

Again, you've assumed the critical must be successful before applying rules showing that it might not be. And that assumption you then use to say those rules could not apply.

Well, right now I need to focus on one argument only, as trying to argue both is too confusing.

For now, I will focus on CoverOps' argument that when you "score a critical hit" you may actually have missed.

I say that's bunk. If you actually "score a critical hit" then you,well, have a critical hit and apply critical damage as explained in the rules introducing critical hits on page 276. On the other hand, if you have only possibly scored a critical hit, that's whole different matter.

I simply can no longer do this three-way debate where I am trying to argue against two fundamentally different positions at the same time. It's too confusing.

 

[DracoSuave]

I say that's bunk. If you actually "score a critical hit" then you,well, have a critical hit and apply critical damage as explained in the rules introducing critical hits on page 276. On the other hand, if you have only possibly scored a critical hit, that's whole different matter.

Awesome.

Now prove that Holy Ardor definatively scores a critical hit, and that it gets around the need to hit, that rules that would prevent it from hitting -cannot work.-

Prove that, you prove your case.

Because as it stands, all that is needed to -disprove- that is a case where Holy Ardor does not hit, and that's trivial.

 

[Kraydak]

What is the Precision rule - chopped liver?

Yes. Everything that the Precision rule could refer to takes rules priority over the Precision rule. Oops!

For sake of argument, if Critical Hits were a subset of Hits, then unless carefully written, class features/feats/etc... that grant critical hits would contradict Precision, and take priority over it.

Critical Hits are subset of Hit, that is how the rules are structured, they are also structured so that if your result might be a Critical (Natural 20 or Precision) you still might Miss and thus not get a Critical Hit. But all actual Crits are actual Hits, without some sort of special rule to say the normal Crit rules (including Precision) do not apply.

Critical hits are defined on page 278. They are at the same level as Insubstantial, Conditions and Forced Movement, none of which only apply on hits. (twould be funny if Insubstantial didn't work on misses, mind.....)
The page 276 Hit section talking about criticals is there only to define the baseline way to get a critical hit, and doesn't matter when you have other critical hit triggers.

 

[CovertOps]

There is no need to look to page 278 for that. Page 276 DEFINES Critical Hit as one of the possible results of Hit or Miss. Since it is one of the possible HIT results, if you "score a critical hit" you hit."

Bottom line:

If you "score a critical hit" you have hit. There is just no way around it - that's they it is defined.

It's beyond ludicrous to think you can have actually scored a critical hit and yet missed.



Well, right now I need to focus on one argument only, as trying to argue both is too confusing.

For now, I will focus on CoverOps' argument that when you "score a critical hit" you may actually have missed.

I say that's bunk. If you actually "score a critical hit" then you,well, have a critical hit and apply critical damage as explained in the rules introducing critical hits on page 276. On the other hand, if you have only possibly scored a critical hit, that's whole different matter.

I simply can no longer do this three-way debate where I am trying to argue against two fundamentally different positions at the same time. It's too confusing.

It's really simple Artoomis, but you don't even bother addressing my issue at all. My point is that if you compare your attack roll and that attack roll says you miss then you never get to invoke Holy Ardor or any other critical power because you never get to the "Apply Damage" phase of attack resolution and therefore you are (were?) never granted the critical hit in the first place.

If you want to try and defend something try defending my points from my last post. Holy Ardor is not an "attack roll". You have said it and I'll agree to it. On that assumption you therefore CANNOT invoke/use Holy Ardor during either step 3 (make attack roll) or step 4 (compare attack roll to ...) because both of those steps need an attack roll in order to resolve. Your assertion is that Holy Ardor grants you a whole new way to get a critical hit and a Hit because it is NOT an attack roll. My point is because it isn't an attack roll you are not allowed to invoke it's use until step 5 (apply damage). What you are trying to do is no different from my examples above (repeated here):

What if I tried to perform an OA on my turn. Does that work?
What if I tried to perform a move action when it isn't my turn. Does that work?
What if I tried to use Weapon Focus during "Compare your attack roll..." Does that work?

All of these are examples of trying to use an ability that doesn't apply to the situation given. You are trying to use Holy Ardor in a situation to which it does not apply.

EDIT: On the other hand if Holy Ardor IS an attack roll then it doesn't create the new path to a critical you claim it does and the normal hit rules still apply.

 

[DracoSuave]

Yes. Everything that the Precision rule could refer to takes rules priority over the Precision rule. Oops!

For sake of argument, if Critical Hits were a subset of Hits, then unless carefully written, class features/feats/etc... that grant critical hits would contradict Precision, and take priority over it.

And this is the problem.

This means that rules that tell you how to do something cannot be used.

So, critical hits cannot be governed by the general rule that tells you not to automaticly hit, as you claim? That means that you also cannot deal maximum damage with them, because while the 'General' rule of critical hits say you do, no power exists in the game that grants you permission to deal -a single point- of damage over what it claims in the text.

SPECIFIC (a power) beats GENERAL (a rule) AMIRITE?

I guarantee you that if -this- is the correct interpretation, you cannot so much as deal a single hit point of damage using fourth edition. This is because damage (a general rule) cannot deduct from hit points (a number specific to each class).


This is the natural ramification of the idea that 'specific beats general' meaning 'everything specific beats everything general no matter what'.

That is incorrect. Specific beats general -only when there is a contradiction.- And when you have a situation that has a rule governing it and tells you -exactly- how to adjudicate it, you -do not have a contradiction- even if it doesn't turn out exactly how you want it.

I suggest you reread "Specific beats General" beyond those three words, and read -the entire paragraph.- You will notice that it is -very- clear that it only applies when there are contradictions.

A contradiction is when you have a rule that says 'You score a critical hit on natural 20s' and a specific ability that says 'You score a critical hit on 19-20.' A contradiction -does not occur- when you then have a rule that says 'Some abilities allow you to score critical hits on numbers other than 20. Only a natural 20 is an automatic hit.)' because that rule is -telling you how to use them.- It is clarifying what those exceptions -can and cannot do.- Which means if that exception wants to do something other than that, then it not only needs to except -the first rule- but also -the rule that tells you how it works.-

An example of this is simple: If you have a push power, you always count it from the user of the power, not the origin point. As well, every square of motion must be away. We understand this. However, powers exist which change the point from where the pushes come from... those powers do not suddenly say 'Oh yeah, and you don't have to worry about the away part'. All rules that are not contradicted by the change in origin square -are not excepted by the power.-

And Precision is -not- contradicted by Holy Ardor.

 

[Kraydak]

And this is the problem.

This means that rules that tell you how to do something cannot be used.

So, critical hits cannot be governed by the general rule that tells you not to automaticly hit, as you claim? That means that you also cannot deal maximum damage with them, because while the 'General' rule of critical hits say you do, no power exists in the game that grants you permission to deal -a single point- of damage over what it claims in the text.

SPECIFIC (a power) beats GENERAL (a rule) AMIRITE?

Not in the slightest. The critical hit rules redefine how you interpret the XdY definitions.

I guarantee you that if -this- is the correct interpretation, you cannot so much as deal a single hit point of damage using fourth edition. This is because damage (a general rule) cannot deduct from hit points (a number specific to each class).

If the rules for the current hit points were defined by class (and con, and feat etc...), as opposed to the actual case, where the maximum hp were defined by them, you might have a case. The good news is, barring a specific feat/power/etc... (which would take priority) that targets your maximum hp total, we don't have to worry about that.

This is the natural ramification of the idea that 'specific beats general' meaning 'everything specific beats everything general no matter what'.

That is incorrect. Specific beats general -only when there is a contradiction.- And when you have a situation that has a rule governing it and tells you -exactly- how to adjudicate it, you -do not have a contradiction- even if it doesn't turn out exactly how you want it.

Dead on correct, which is why I preface all my specific-trumps -general comments with a "in the hypothetical case that critical hits are a type of hit" comment. There is no contradiction at all if they aren't. There is a contradiction if they are. This is because if they are, then a statement that "you get a crit" is equivalent to "you get a hit and a crit".

I suggest you reread "Specific beats General" beyond those three words, and read -the entire paragraph.- You will notice that it is -very- clear that it only applies when there are contradictions.

Yes. Very much yes, and a point that many people ignore.

A contradiction is when you have a rule that says 'You score a critical hit on natural 20s' and a specific ability that says 'You score a critical hit on 19-20.' A contradiction -does not occur- when you then have a rule that says 'Some abilities allow you to score critical hits on numbers other than 20. Only a natural 20 is an automatic hit.)' because that rule is -telling you how to use them.- It is clarifying what those exceptions -can and cannot do.- Which means if that exception wants to do something other than that, then it not only needs to except -the first rule- but also -the rule that tells you how it works.-

*If* critical hits are a subset of hits, *THEN* there is, very much, a contradiction. This is in the same sense that I don't have to say, every time, that every time you use the rules for a halberd, you also use the rules for a polearm. Because a halberd is a subset of polearms, if I give you a halberd, I am also giving you a polearm.

An example of this is simple: If you have a push power, you always count it from the user of the power, not the origin point. As well, every square of motion must be away. We understand this. However, powers exist which change the point from where the pushes come from... those powers do not suddenly say 'Oh yeah, and you don't have to worry about the away part'. All rules that are not contradicted by the change in origin square -are not excepted by the power.-

And Precision is -not- contradicted by Holy Ardor.

True, but only because you can trigger crits on misses.