Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BobTheNob" data-source="post: 4896651" data-attributes="member: 82425">Can I answer that with a question? Does it matter?Fact is that one ability, if you twist your thinking in the non favorable manner, it is singularly lack luster.If however you take the permissive approach (which by my perception is actually RAW until someone can prove to me the Precision is NOT the general rule, and I repeat, its not wording that makes a rule specific, its breadth of application) it puts the power on par with similar crit effecting PP's.So the question becomes, if by interpreting permissibly the net result is that the power goes from lackluster to passable (and balanced against other PP's)...why wouldn't you?We really have to get our heads around what specific vs general is. Specific does not mean "thoroughly worded" or "well documented". Specific means that the rule applies to a limited subset.Likewise a "General" rule is not one with ambiguous of loose wording. It means a rule with a breadth that covers the normal case of the game dynamic.So all the normal rules regarding crits (natural 20 is a crit is can hit, natural 20 is the only automatic hit, yada yada) are very clearly worded and I am glad we understand them, but they are the General Rules.Therefore, given Holy Ardor is a specific rule (as defined by the fact that it pertain to a much narrower game subset) that conflicts with these, the rule of specific trumps general applies, and therefore the two rolls hit regardless of whether it would naturally have been a miss.</blockquote>

Verification