critical hits and auto-hit adjacent targets?

[mattdm]

So, in our last game, the infernal-pact warlock scored a crit with Fiery Bolt. The target took 22 points of damage — no question there. But, what about the adjacent creatures? My common sense says you can't crit without a roll for that specific creature. They players argued that the critical hit rules on page 278 don't say that the attack roll has to be specific to the target (and that the damage to other targets is clearly not covered by the "extra damage dice" point).

Following my general "err in the players' favor and don't hold up the game" policy, I let the warlock have the glorious all-around max damage — with the caveat that I'd make an official ruling later.

I'm pretty sure that official ruling will be with my common sense. But I'd like to hear what you all think.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Looks to me like both the 3d6 and the 1d6 are maximised; they're both damage rolls in the 'Hit' entry of the attack that rolled a Natural 20.

If it was Hit: 3d6 to target; Effect: 1d6 to adjacent enemies, I'd agree that the 1d6 isn't maximised. But the 1d6 in Fiery Bolt is damage from the hit, and if the hit is a critical, that damage is maximised.

-Hyp.

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

I'm not sure I would agree - there is no roll to hit the other targets, which to me means that the extra damage IS an effect, whether or not the power says so.

For example, if a power says x damage plus stunned, does that mean the stunned isn't an effect.

IMHO, a natural 20 will only cause a critical against opponents against which that die is rolled.


Dr. Ruminahui - shrink with a spear

 

[Syrsuro]

I'm inclined to go with the max damage because the damage is dependant upon the attack roll (if you miss, there is no damage to the adjacent targets) hit.

But I admit that this 'feels' wrong.

And I agree - If it were an Effect, the damage would not be dependant upon the attack roll*

Is this the only power with variable damage that is not dependant upon an attack?

Carl

*note: "Effect" in this context (the line item in a power) is not synonymous with "effect" (something that affects a target). In this context, "Stun" is only an Effect (first meaning) if it is listed as an Effect in the Power description and in that case it will affect the target regardless of whether or not the attack hits.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Is this the only power with variable damage that is not dependant upon an attack?

Check out Holy Spark (Cleric 15) for a lovely example.

On Pain Of Death (Paladin 1) is another example; Hellish Rebuke (Warlock 1); Flying Foe (Rogue 19); Blood Pulse (Blood Mage 11).

Two-Weapon Eviscerate (Ranger 17) I'm not sure about. Is the extra 1d10 maxed if both attacks hit and one crits? Only if both crit? Never? (Same question with Manticore's Volley, Rgr 23; Death Rend, Rgr 27.)

-Hyp.

 

[Syrsuro]

Check out Holy Spark (Cleric 15) for a lovely example.

On Pain Of Death (Paladin 1) is another example.

Two-Weapon Eviscerate (Ranger 17) I'm not sure about. Is the extra 1d10 maxed if both attacks hit and one crits? Only if both crit? Never? (Same question with Manticore's Volley, Rgr 23; Death Rend, Rgr 27.)

-Hyp.

Although similar in some ways, I see that as a different thing.

I see that as a variable effect contingent upon the ongoing damage, not on the original attack. I know its a subtle difference, but it's sufficient in my mind to suggest a different ruling.

Among the differences is that the damage is not coincidental with the attack but rather occurs on subsequent turns. If it had been written: "... and 2d10 ongoing lightning damage. While this power's ongoing damage is in effect, any ally of the target that starts its turn within 3 squares of the target takes the same quantity of lightning damage as the original target." then I might have considered it to be comparable.

Likewise On Pain of Death: It is a different matter - a condition is imposed that has the potential for damage.

Two Weapon Eviscerate (and others) is a more interesting question. I would say (in the absence of a contradictory rule/ruling) that if both are criticals the damage is maximized, but not if only one is a critical.

However, a persuasive player might be able to convince me that only the second hit need be a critical (assuming the first was a hit). Maybe.(Essentially by arguing that the first hit created the opportunity, but the second hit did the extra damage). I guess it depends on whether you see the two attacks as truely simultaneous or following each other in quick succession within the brief span of an attack action.

Carl

 

[Hypersmurf]

Another couple above (post edited).

-Hyp.

 

[Gruns]

We're talking, what, 2 and a half damage per extra creature that happens to be adjacent? Let him have his glory! Max damage all around!
Flavor wise, it was one single Fiery Bolt that happened to burn a little brighter than the Fiery Bolts he normally unleashes.
Later!
Gruns

 

[Fede]

I agree with hypersmurf, the damage is all listed under the same "Hit:" line, so it's all maximized.

Side question: what about fixed damage powers (eg. cleave)? ok, the damage to the adjacent enemy is fixed, but what if i have a magical weapon that adds 1d6 to critical damage?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I agree with hypersmurf, the damage is all listed under the same "Hit:" line, so it's all maximized.

Side question: what about fixed damage powers (eg. cleave)? ok, the damage to the adjacent enemy is fixed, but what if i have a magical weapon that adds 1d6 to critical damage?

Hmm. Let's say a Warlord crits with Furious Smash. It deals a fixed damage (Str mod), so anything that adds to damage rolls won't apply... but the magic weapon doesn't add to damage rolls, it adds to an attack that deals damage.

Accordingly, a crit with a +1 weapon and Furious Smash should deal Str mod + 1d6.

If it's a +1 scimitar, arguably, it should deal Str mod + 1d6 + 1[W], since a crit with a High Crit weapon adds 1[W]... though it could be argued that since it adds an extra 1[W], it can't apply if the attack isn't dealing any [W]s to begin with...

I believe it's beeen ruled that a Warlock with Hellfire Blood who uses Hellish Rebuke adds his +1 damage to both the initial and extra 1d6+Con damages, so in theory if he's using a +1 Rod and he crits, he should be dealing 6+1d6+1+Con both times, as well.

If both Furious Smash and Hellish Rebuke benefit from the +1d6 on a crit, I'd assume Cleave would as well. If either or both of them don't, that could be used to argue that Cleave does not.

-Hyp.