NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ydars" data-source="post: 4764865" data-attributes="member: 62992">This is one I had come up when I was playing. I was a Rogue8/Wiz3 with practised spellcaster to make my shocking grasp deal 5d6. I routinely used a spell-storing rapier to deliver the spell. The DM always ruled that if the rapier critted, then the spell did as well for this reason: we only rolled one attack roll, even though shocking grasp normally attacks TOUCH AC and normally gets +3 to the roll versus opponents wearing metal. Yet we do not include these bonuses to hit when resolving the attack because both are resolved by a single roll So using it as a spell in a rapier makes it HARDER to hit opponents with shocking grasp. This therefore also makes it harder to confirm a critical with the spell.  Also, from a purely simulationist point of view, if you stab someone in a vital organ (crit) then the spell discharges, it will do alot more damage (also crit). The only fair alternative (IMHO) is to make ONE attack roll but resolve it twice: 1) versus touch AC with a +3 attack for the spell if the opponent is wearing metal armour, since you only have to touch someone with the rapier to discharge the spell (in fact the +3 suggests you only have to brush near the armour to discharge via something like an arc). 2) look at the same roll versus normal AC and resolve the physical part of the attack that way. I would not like to roll twice because both attacks are part of one action and so this does not simulate reality well.</blockquote>

Verification