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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 4927366" data-attributes="member: 71571">Look.  I'm -tired- of explaining this over and over again.So pay attention.  Watch.Attack invisible creature.  Fail to guess which square he is in.  Fail to hit.Okay?  You following?  Good.It is now -proven- that Holy Ardor does not override -all- hit-related rules, because there is a hit-related rule it does not override.For godsake this is logic 001.  Not even 101.And if there exists a hit-related rule it does not override, than the argument that it overrides rules is debunked.  Completely.  End of sentance.  There is no 'it is suggested.'  There is no 'They intended.'  It is catagorically -debunked.-  -Disproven.-  It is simply not the case.So, follow along here.'The ability says you score a critical hit' is -proven- to not mean 'you score a critical hit' because there exist cases where the rules go 'Sorry, not today.'So the question then is -which rules apply- and -which rules do not apply.-  For that, you look to see which ones Holy Ardor contradicts, and which one it doesn't.  Holy Ardor -only- contradicts the situations you can roll a critical hit in.  However, it does not say -one damn thing- about situations you can roll a hit in.Now, if you've read this far enough then you've read the whole thing enough to know 'score a critical hit' is insufficient to guarantee a critical hit.'I don't see how it is possible' only proves you're not reading the argument are are ignoring the evidence.  So don't fall back on that.  Because you're... as someone put it... ostriching.So, Holy Ardor doesn't contradict -any- of the hit-related rules, and you know that hit-related rules can apply, so you apply the hit-related rules.  The change in crit range can't affect hit-related rules by themselves, because Precision clarifies that the automatic hit rules do not extend to crit altering abilities.  Without that, if you wouldn't normally hit, you'd apply those rules and those rules cancel out the crit -anyways-.It is correct that you cannot score a critical hit without scoring a hit.  This is irrefutable, we all accept this.Which means that if -by any means- you fail to hit, you do not score that critical hit.  And without any part of the power telling you -which- failure points you do and do not use, you have no contradiction of the miss rules, and therefore you apply them all.So let's summarize this.  Facts in evidence will be presented in green.1- Holy Ardor tells you you score a critical hit.  Fact.2- Abilities that say you do something do not guarantee that event successfully happens. Proven by example.  Fact.3- There exists a case where Holy Ardor can miss -even if it would otherwise hit-. Proven by example.  Fact.4- Holy Ardor therefore does not guarantee a successful critical hit.  Only possible conclusion of 2+3.5- A successfull critical hit implies that you hit.  Logical implication6- A miss is not a hit. Fact.7- An unsuccessful hit implies an unsuccesful critical hit. Converse implication from 58- A miss implies an unsuccessful critical. 6+79- Holy Ardor contains no language that explicitly contradicts any rules dictating a miss. Fact.10- Holy Ardor's 'score a critical hit' cannot implicitly contradict any rules dictating a miss. Only possible conclusion of 4+5+611- Holy Ardor does not contradict any rules dictating a miss. 9+1012- You apply all pertinent miss rules in the absense of a contradictory rule. Fact.13- If you fail to beat a target's defenses without a Natural 20, you miss. Fact.14- If you fail to beat a target's defenses without a Natural 20 with Holy Ardor, you miss. 11+12+13.QED.It is now proven Holy Ardor does miss when it fails to hit defenses, and said proof has nothing to do with Precision.Thank you.  This was fun.Edit:  Of course, one could argue that 5 is not true, that a successful critical hit does not guarantee a hit.  In that case, 9 is still true, and 10 is still true, and therefore the argument still stands.  Defeating that premise does not weaken the argument... rather it simplifies it.</blockquote>

Verification