Followup Damage

[Hypersmurf]

So, do you think that a warlord's flaming weapon lets an ally deal fire damage?

See the additional questions in the post above regarding Furious Smash.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The weapon keyword of Commander's Strike refers to the melee 'reach' the Warlord must be to the target. If the Warlord has a pole arm he has to be within 2 squares, otherwise he'd have to be adjacent.

Right. But that's not all the Weapon keyword designates for a power. Because the power has the Weapon keyword, he can use a weapon as an accessory for the power... and if he does, the rules for weapons as accessories apply.

-Hyp.

 

[Nikosandros]

See the additional questions in the post above regarding Furious Smash.

Well, as I stated earlier, this interpretation is, IMVHO, illogical. The warlord is threatening the enemy with his weapon (thus the reach), but he isn't actually attacking. He's creating an opening that his ally can exploit. The relevant weapon stats are from the weapon that actually delivers the attack.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Well, as I stated earlier, this interpretation is, IMVHO, illogical. The warlord is threatening the enemy with his weapon (thus the reach), but he isn't actually attacking. He's creating an opening that his ally can exploit. The relevant weapon stats are from the weapon that actually delivers the attack.

So if the Warlord uses Furious Smash, designating his +1 Flaming Longsword as the accessory satisfying the Weapon keyword of the power, and says "I drive my shoulder into his gut" (as suggested by the flavour text), do the proficiency bonus and enhancement bonus of the longsword not apply, since the 'weapon that actually delivers the attack' is the shoulder? Can the damage he deals be flaming damage, since the Flaming weapon is the accessory, or not, since he's hitting with his shoulder?

-Hyp.

 

[WalterKovacs]

The distinction between Furious Smash and Commander's Strike is that the "end result" of Commander's Strike is a basic melee attack. This basic melee attack is a SEPERATE attack with a bonus. In other words, you use your weapon and choose a target, you don't roll to hit because regardless of a hit or a miss, you get your effect. Your effect is to give someone else an attack with a bonus. This starts a new attack, seperate from your own, with it's own keywords that your ally applies. No damage is dealt by Commander's Strike, all the damage is dealt by the resulting basic attack, which does receive a bonus from commander's strike [just like a later attack recieves a bonus from Furious Smash but isn't considered to be part of a furious smash].

The resulting attack is not part of the attack that caused it as an effect.

[Edit: Admitedly, the power is worded poorly. It shouldn't use the Hit/Damage wording, but instead merely read as an Effect, similar to a utility power that has a range. The way it's worded it could be interpreted that your ally's attacks and does damage to the target. You then take that damage, add your Int mod to it, and deal that damage again, and it's treated as coming from your weapon].

 

[Hypersmurf]

The distinction between Furious Smash and Commander's Strike is that the "end result" of Commander's Strike is a basic melee attack. This basic melee attack is a SEPERATE attack with a bonus.

The resulting attack is not part of the attack that caused it as an effect.

Commander's Strike doesn't cause the basic melee attack as an effect, though - that was my point in comparing Commander's Strike to Surprise Attack.

The basic melee attack is the Attack entry of Commander's Strike, and the damage of the basic attack is the Damage entry of Commander's Strike. The basic attack's damage is not a separate entity that the power triggered; it is the damage of Commander's Strike, and so it is, technically, damage dealt by the weapon which is the accessory of Commander's Strike, just as the damage dealt by Furious Smash is damage dealt by the weapon which is the accessory of Furious Smash, even if you say "I hit him with my shoulder".

What is the damage of Surprise Attack? 1[W] + Str. The damage dealt by your ally's basic attack is not damage dealt by Surprise Attack; the basic attack is a separate effect triggered by the power.

What is the damage dealt by Commander's Strike? The damage of your ally's basic attack, plus your Int mod. The ally's basic attack is the attack of Commander's Strike, and Commander's Strike has the Weapon keyword.

Edit: Admitedly, the power is worded poorly. It shouldn't use the Hit/Damage wording, but instead merely read as an Effect, similar to a utility power that has a range].

If Commander's Strike had an Effect, instead of Attack and Damage entries, I wouldn't be arguing. But it doesn't have an Effect, and it does have Attack and Damage entries. That's exactly my point!

The way it's worded it could be interpreted that your opponent attacks and does damage to the target. You then take that damage, add your Int mod to it, and deal that damage again, and it's treated as coming from your weapon].

Assuming you mean ally, yeah - I was saving that one for later But I'm inclined to discount it, because again, the basic attack is the Attack entry, and the Attack entry determines whether or not the power hits. If the basic attack is successful, the power hits, and damage is dealt by the power, rather than by the basic attack.

But there's certainly a case to be made for the doubled damage based on the wording.

-Hyp.

 

[Nikosandros]

But there's certainly a case to be made for the doubled damage based on the wording.

Are you serious about that?

We are clearly coming at this from wildly different angles... you seem to be trying to read the rules like they were a legal contract. They are not meant to be and they are not written all that clearly, coherently and unambiguously anyway.

Edit: it's always difficult to convey the tone through a post... I don't meant to "attack" you. Your mastery of the rules is obvious, I simply wanted to highlight that I believe we're having a very different approach to this issue.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Are you serious about that?

Like I say, it's not how I read it, but I think it could be read that way.

I still don't know how you feel about the Furious Smash 'with the shoulder', while using a flaming longsword as the accessory. Enhancement and proficiency bonuses, yes or no? Fire damage, yes or no?

-Hyp.

 

[Nikosandros]

Li
I still don't know how you feel about the Furious Smash 'with the shoulder', while using a flaming longsword as the accessory. Enhancement and proficiency bonuses, yes or no? Fire damage, yes or no?

Honestly, I'm not sure... it's another power that could have used a clearer description. I think I would say yes, because it's the warlord who is actually performing the attack.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Honestly, I'm not sure... it's another power that could have used a clearer description. I think I would say yes, because it's the warlord who is actually performing the attack.

The Warlord is actually performing an attack with Commander's Strike as well - he's using a melee attack power. Anything that triggers off "Warlord makes a melee attack" will happen, like Riposte Strike or Divine Challenge.

I don't see a difference between "The Warlord hits the orc with his shoulder, and his Flaming Longsword deals fire damage since it's the accessory for the power", and "The Warlord hits the orc with his ally's battleaxe, and his Flaming Longsword deals fire damage since it's the accessory for the power". In both cases, you're going to have to make cinematic justifications for why the damage was fire damage even though the longsword wasn't what hit the orc in the gut. In both cases, the mechanics apply regardless of the cinematics; the power has the Weapon keyword, so the damage is damage dealt by the weapon.

-Hyp.