Bonus damage with cleave + magic weapon

[Sceadeau]

This has been bugging me since 4ed came out -- when do you add the extra damage from a magic weapon or implement:

Does cleave's secondary target take additional damage equal to the magic weapon bonus of the weapon?

Does the extra damage at the beginning of the round with cloud of daggers get affected by the magic implement bonus?

On reaping strike, do you deal additional damage equal to the magic weapon bonus when you miss?

Do the iron armbands of power add even when you miss? For example, is reaping strike basically just auto damage minus the [w]? Or just a tiny fraction (str)

Examples from the rules or reasoning from the rules appreciated -- I just can't find it. I could just be blind.

Thanks.

 

[Mentat55]

From PHB:

(p. 232) "A magic weapon adds an enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls" (emphasis mine)

Similar wording, i.e., attack and damage rolls, exists in the text for magic holy symbols, orbs, rods, staffs, and wands.

Many feats and magic item powers also mention damage rolls. If you are not rolling for attack or damage, you are not adding the enhancement bonus.

Since you don't roll for the extra damage caused by Cleave, or the damage caused on a miss with Reaping Strike, or for the damage caused by Cloud of Daggers at the beginning of the enemy's turn, you do not add the enhancement bonus.

 

[Sceadeau]

True -- however check out page 55 in direct contrast:

Accessories: These keywords identify items used with the power. If you have a proficiency bonus to attack rolls from your weapon or an enhancement bonus to your attack rolls and damage rolls from a magic weapon or an implement, you add that bonus when you use a power that has the associated keyword.

editted to add: hmm, still says "rolls" -- ok. thanks!

 

[Oompa]

Does cleave's secondary target take additional damage equal to the magic weapon bonus of the weapon?

On reaping strike, do you deal additional damage equal to the magic weapon bonus when you miss?

No..

Cleave: and an enemy adjacent to you other than the target takes damage equal to your Strength modifier, nothing else..

Reaping Strike: Also only str modifier damage..

 

[gribble]

Cleave: and an enemy adjacent to you other than the target takes damage equal to your Strength modifier, nothing else..

And all other powers state that a target takes damage equal to X[W] + your Strength modifier, nothing else...

The question is about whether the weapon bonuses apply to any power with the weapon keyword, or just to the X[W] part, and from my reading it could be interpreted either way.

Certainly, looking at my warlord's opening shove power card generated by the Character Builder, it does deal damage equal to my weapon enhancement + weapon focus, without any x[W] for a successful hit... could be argued it's a bug, or could be that's the way the powers are meant to be interpreted.

 

[Oompa]

Opening shove is a attack that does no damage for you..

You may push the target or a ally gets a attack..

 

[gribble]

Opening shove is a attack that does no damage for you..

Thats exactly my point. The power doesn't even do Str damage, let alone x[W]. But it is a weapon power, and the Character Builder lists the damage as (0) + 5 (3 for weapon enhancement and 2 for weapon focus)...

 

[MarkB]

Thats exactly my point. The power doesn't even do Str damage, let alone x[W]. But it is a weapon power, and the Character Builder lists the damage as (0) + 5 (3 for weapon enhancement and 2 for weapon focus)...

When did you last update your copy? Because mine (with an 11th-level warlord) lists it as Jagged Greatsword +3: +16 attack, 0 damage.

 

[gribble]

When did you last update your copy? Because mine (with an 11th-level warlord) lists it as Jagged Greatsword +3: +16 attack, 0 damage.

Weird. I updated mine at the end of February with the last release... do you have weapon focus? His weapon is a staff of ruin, so actually it makes sense that it might just be the item bonus from a staff of ruin + weapon focus, and not the enhancement bonus.

Makes sense, because this seems like it could be a bug...