Flaming whip

[Sil]

Hypersmurf

The flaming weapon enhancement modified the weapon. The whip may deal no damage against an armored opponent, but the flaming enhancement overrides the no damage rule and adds 1d6 flaming.

You have mis-ordered the precedents. Weapon rules are modified by magical enhancement rules, not the other way around.

 

[Caliban]

The rules specifically state that the weapon is dealing the damage.

-Hyp.

Because the RAW is the only thing that matters when interpretting the rules, forever and ever, amen.

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

Because the RAW is the only thing that matters when interpretting the rules, forever and ever, amen.

Does this mean someone sending off a question to the sage wouldn’t end this debate?

 

[Fieari]

Correct. When the Sage contradicts the RAW (and he's been known to) the RAW trumps the Sage. The RAW trumps the FAQ too, for that matter. The RAW trumps everything except:

1) House Rules (which are perfectly fine, but here we have a seperate forum to discuss them)

and

2) Errata (which then are made part of the RAW)

(As a side note, I agree with Hypersmurf, but since he's doing a fine job of explaining the situation, I really have little to add in that respect. Granted, in my game I might disagree with the RAW, and house rule it otherwise, but I'd recognize it as a house rule)

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

Correct. When the Sage contradicts the RAW (and he's been known to) the RAW trumps the Sage. The RAW trumps the FAQ too, for that matter. The RAW trumps everything except.

So it’s officially nothing, huh? (I would imagine a real reply would be for another thread. )

 

[Hypersmurf]

Assuming normal (nonmagical) fire isn't quite so discerning:
Suppose a whip is treated with pitch or some other combustible liquid, lit on fire, and used to attack said troll? Is it still not receiving damage?

It depends on how the DM phrases the ruling on setting a whip on fire with pitch.

If he says that the fire deals 1d3 (say) fire damage, it works. If he says that the whip deals +1d3 fire damage, it doesn't.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I think that the fire would still penetrate the armor from a whip. The actual whip needs to find that weak spot in the armor to do the (1d3 S dmg) but the flaming part ... i see it as a touch attack, meaning it does not have to go THROUGH the armor but just touch it. If you are a near a furnace .. you will feel the heat through your full plate so that is how i would look at it.

So if someone has an AC of 18 and a touch AC of 10 (full plate, say), and I roll a 14 with my Flaming Longsword, do they take the fire damage, since my attack roll beat their touch AC?

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

Correct. When the Sage contradicts the RAW (and he's been known to) the RAW trumps the Sage. The RAW trumps the FAQ too, for that matter. The RAW trumps everything except:

1) House Rules (which are perfectly fine, but here we have a seperate forum to discuss them)

and

2) Errata (which then are made part of the RAW)

(As a side note, I agree with Hypersmurf, but since he's doing a fine job of explaining the situation, I really have little to add in that respect. Granted, in my game I might disagree with the RAW, and house rule it otherwise, but I'd recognize it as a house rule)

Of course, none of this is necessarily true, just what certain people want to be true.

 

[Caliban]

Does this mean someone sending off a question to the sage wouldn’t end this debate?

It would end it for some people. For others, the Sage means nothing. Some people have this peculiar view of the rules as a sort of holy text that must be taken in the most literal and narrow view in all cases. If that means the rules allow bizarre loopholes that fly in the face of reason, you just have to accept it.

Not all of us view the rulebooks as quite so set in stone. The rules are there for a reason, but the game designers are not prophets, and they are not infallible. Some of us have the heretical belief that our sense of how the world works is just as important as the RAW when it comes to running the game.

 

[Caliban]

It depends on how the DM phrases the ruling on setting a whip on fire with pitch.

If he says that the fire deals 1d3 (say) fire damage, it works. If he says that the whip deals +1d3 fire damage, it doesn't.

-Hyp.

Because what he actually means doesn't matter, just how he happened to write it down.