Can Sharpshooter be used with a Net?

[lingual]

Adding SS or sneak attack damage to a net is as munchkin as it gets.

Null does not equal 0 too. 0 is an integer. Null isn't even a number. As regards to hit point loss, 0 and null can be considered equivalent in effect. But they are not equal.

I can imagine a high level rogue critting on a net (or bubble wand) and dealing 20d6 damage. If there's no damage type, then I suppose it can't be resisted too!

 

[FrogReaver]

Damage exists, but the damage dealt by a net does not. Saying a net does 0 damage is like saying soap does 0 damage. It’s not accurate because neither piece of adventuring gear is used to deal damage. You could maybe use either as an improvised weapon at DM discretion, but then the damage isn’t 0 either, and it’s also more accurate to describe that damage as “improvised weapon damage” than as soap or net damage.

But Soap also does 0 damage...

 

[FrogReaver]

No the net is on the weapon chart for easy of finding it. A hit with a net cause the restrained condition. A condition is an effect, not damage. And I would not allow any feat, bs, language lawyering, etc for a normal net do damage. Also the property of a net is SPECIAL. So since specific over rides general. The Special effect means the No damage is not zero.

The net is a special weapon that restrains. Since restraining causes no damage then the net causes no damage. Since no damage is 0 damage then the net does 0 damage.

 

[FrogReaver]

Adding SS or sneak attack damage to a net is as munchkin as it gets.

Null does not equal 0 too. 0 is an integer. Null isn't even a number. As regards to hit point loss, 0 and null can be considered equivalent in effect. But they are not equal.

I can imagine a high level rogue critting on a net (or bubble wand) and dealing 20d6 damage. If there's no damage type, then I suppose it can't be resisted too!

The argument isn’t that null = 0. It’s that no damage = 0 damage

 

[jasper]

The argument isn’t that null = 0. It’s that no damage = 0 damage

That is what you want the argument to be. As a DM I rule that "No damage not = 0 damage". So Sneak Attack, Sharpshooter, etc would not apply to a net. You can continue to argue but you will not change my mind even I all the creators would arrive at my house to argue in your favor. I seen these arguments since the early 80s where people what all common language rules to apply, when the game uses common language to mean game terms. AKA Monks save vs Death magic for no damage. Even if Thor smites with a certain hammer.

 

[FrogReaver]

That is what you want the argument to be. As a DM I rule that "No damage not = 0 damage". So Sneak Attack, Sharpshooter, etc would not apply to a net. You can continue to argue but you will not change my mind even I all the creators would arrive at my house to argue in your favor. I seen these arguments since the early 80s where people what all common language rules to apply, when the game uses common language to mean game terms. AKA Monks save vs Death magic for no damage. Even if Thor smites with a certain hammer.

Huh? My first post in this thread was play this RAI. At this point I’m just here to correct the faulty math. No damage = 0 damage just like no apples = 0 apples

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Unless the net can’t do damage. Then it’s not 0 damage. 0 denotes a possibility for damage since you can potentially stack more damage on it. I mean, I suppose you could rule that a length Of rope does 0 damage (since that’s what a net is) and let a rogue with sharpshooter sneak attack with it. It seems a bit ridiculous to me so I would just rule that it’s impossible to do damage by throwing a length of rope at someone. When I say impossible, I mean absolutely no potential at all. A rope would not do 0 damage. Which means there is no potential for damage.

But you know this already. You get what we are saying. You are clearly saying that a net lets you stack damage on top of 0. We are clearly saying that a net has no potential to do damage.

 

[FrogReaver]

Unless the net can’t do damage. Then it’s not 0 damage. 0 denotes a possibility for damage since you can potentially stack more damage on it. I mean, I suppose you could rule that a length Of rope does 0 damage (since that’s what a net is) and let a rogue with sharpshooter sneak attack with it. It seems a bit ridiculous to me so I would just rule that it’s impossible to do damage by throwing a length of rope at someone. When I say impossible, I mean absolutely no potential at all. A rope would not do 0 damage. Which means there is no potential for damage.

But you know this already. You get what we are saying. You are clearly saying that a net lets you stack damage on top of 0. We are clearly saying that a net has no potential to do damage.

0 doesn’t denote a possibility for damage. F(x) = 0 is 0 for all inputs. One would describe such a damage function as always doing 0 damage. Relying on such a damage function is the proper mathematical description of the damage the net is doing. Trying to talk about a null set when you should be talking about 0 is the issue I’m having.

 

[jasper]

Huh? My first post in this thread was play this RAI. At this point I’m just here to correct the faulty math. No damage = 0 damage just like no apples = 0 apples

It is a word problem before the math.
I deal with a lot of accounting math. If someone has net insurance the cost is 0. Sharpshooter insurance is +5. Then Net Insurance + Sharpshooter insurance + ability mod insurance = insurance result. If net insurance set insurance result to 0.
or to put into game terms. Sharpshooter damage is +5. Stat damage is + y.Weapon damage is x. Net damage is 0.
Formula and code.
If hit damage = sharpshooter damage + ability damage + weapon damage= result.
If result > 0
if weapon = net
move 0 to result.
***comment nets are exception to see heat ticket D&D 5E. See page number 70 of data dictionary. ***
If that drives you crazy, I have accountants freak out because the same one cent gets given to two different brothers during different parts payroll.

If net

 

[FrogReaver]

It is a word problem before the math.
I deal with a lot of accounting math. If someone has net insurance the cost is 0. Sharpshooter insurance is +5. Then Net Insurance + Sharpshooter insurance + ability mod insurance = insurance result. If net insurance set insurance result to 0.
or to put into game terms. Sharpshooter damage is +5. Stat damage is + y.Weapon damage is x. Net damage is 0.
Formula and code.
If hit damage = sharpshooter damage + ability damage + weapon damage= result.
If result > 0
if weapon = net
move 0 to result.
***comment nets are exception to see heat ticket D&D 5E. See page number 70 of data dictionary. ***
If that drives you crazy, I have accountants freak out because the same one cent gets given to two different brothers during different parts payroll.

If net

Yes that is the same concept that f(x) = 0 denotes. There’s no need to try to force set theory and null values when the situation can be described as always setting the damage to 0. More importantly for me is that it is wrong and mathematically incorrect to do so.

Just As you did above in the accounting program or as I am doing for you from the math function perspective. That’s how to denote something that does no damage ever