Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7282931" data-attributes="member: 82106">Ahhhh, yes, the refreshing smell of burning RAW! It has been a number of years now since I did my stint on ye old Q&amp;A forum, but if my rusty brain is correct, there's a clause, possibly in AV1, maybe also reiterated in PHB2? Somewhere, in any case, there is a statement that says that keywords 'follow' damage types. THAT BEING SAID, [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] has certainly brought up the most obvious related issue, and there are plenty of other quirks. My recollection is that the actual phraseology of the statement was itself also not entirely clear about all cases. If memory serves it particularly mentioned the Flametongue (which has a power that can add fire damage to attacks) and its doppleganger, the very popular Frostbrand (cheeze on a stick so to speak). I believe the verbiage is something about an attack having 'all the keywords' of the damage types it inflicts. I think this also didn't address what happens when a damage type is REMOVED, though certainly we can speculate (and again [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] does so).Still, this is all old memories. I don't tend to bother to consult 4e books much anymore when I run things. 'rules questions' being answered as it pleases us (and I really don't play with people who aren't cool with that in my old age).I think [MENTION=336]D'karr[/MENTION] has it about right. Just go with whatever is cool and not absurd and seems to put the fiction and the rules on the same track. Gygax was, off course, totally correct, the rules are only there to make it more fun, its an RPG, not a board game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7282931, member: 82106"] Ahhhh, yes, the refreshing smell of burning RAW! It has been a number of years now since I did my stint on ye old Q&A forum, but if my rusty brain is correct, there's a clause, possibly in AV1, maybe also reiterated in PHB2? Somewhere, in any case, there is a statement that says that keywords 'follow' damage types. THAT BEING SAID, [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] has certainly brought up the most obvious related issue, and there are plenty of other quirks. My recollection is that the actual phraseology of the statement was itself also not entirely clear about all cases. If memory serves it particularly mentioned the Flametongue (which has a power that can add fire damage to attacks) and its doppleganger, the very popular Frostbrand (cheeze on a stick so to speak). I believe the verbiage is something about an attack having 'all the keywords' of the damage types it inflicts. I think this also didn't address what happens when a damage type is REMOVED, though certainly we can speculate (and again [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] does so). Still, this is all old memories. I don't tend to bother to consult 4e books much anymore when I run things. 'rules questions' being answered as it pleases us (and I really don't play with people who aren't cool with that in my old age). I think [MENTION=336]D'karr[/MENTION] has it about right. Just go with whatever is cool and not absurd and seems to put the fiction and the rules on the same track. Gygax was, off course, totally correct, the rules are only there to make it more fun, its an RPG, not a board game. [/QUOTE]

Verification