Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Adent Champion. Rules lawyers required
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Artoomis" data-source="post: 4907038" data-attributes="member: 111"><p>Well, no - you are rolling a <strong><em>number pair</em></strong>, not a number. An entirely new creation for Holy Ardor.</p><p></p><p>I can readily agree, though, that it can be thought of either way and that there is no 100% entirely correct reading based upon RAW only.</p><p></p><p>My opinion is that the preponderance of the evidence suggests that it applies even if the number pair does not have a result that would have been high enough to hit. This is based upon the actual language (which omits any possibility of a "possibility" of a critical hit) as well as the inclusion of the mention of a [air of ones being a miss, which truly only has actual meaning if any pair represents a critical hit as opposed to a possible critical hit.</p><p></p><p>Still, even accepting all the above, that merely makes it more likely than not that the rule is meant to be an automatic critical hit as opposed to a critical hit only if the number on the underlying number pair would have hit anyway. </p><p></p><p>My conclusion? Any matching pair of dice, other than a pair of ones, is an automatic cortical hit whether the number on the dice would have hit or not. The case for this, however, is far from overwhelming; it is merely somewhat stronger than the case against.</p><p></p><p>This is one of those cases where a FAQ entry would be very useful.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Artoomis, post: 4907038, member: 111"] Well, no - you are rolling a [b][i]number pair[/i][/b][i][/i], not a number. An entirely new creation for Holy Ardor. I can readily agree, though, that it can be thought of either way and that there is no 100% entirely correct reading based upon RAW only. My opinion is that the preponderance of the evidence suggests that it applies even if the number pair does not have a result that would have been high enough to hit. This is based upon the actual language (which omits any possibility of a "possibility" of a critical hit) as well as the inclusion of the mention of a [air of ones being a miss, which truly only has actual meaning if any pair represents a critical hit as opposed to a possible critical hit. Still, even accepting all the above, that merely makes it more likely than not that the rule is meant to be an automatic critical hit as opposed to a critical hit only if the number on the underlying number pair would have hit anyway. My conclusion? Any matching pair of dice, other than a pair of ones, is an automatic cortical hit whether the number on the dice would have hit or not. The case for this, however, is far from overwhelming; it is merely somewhat stronger than the case against. This is one of those cases where a FAQ entry would be very useful. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Adent Champion. Rules lawyers required
Top