Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Firzair" data-source="post: 1510716" data-attributes="member: 1334">Hi everybody,this is an interesting discussion.Just to give my two cents, I would allow the interruption of an attack as described above. The damage roll would use the strength bonus at the time of the attack i.e. the throw. This just makes sense as the momentum of the knife was given by the strength at the time of the throw.As for a magical dagger thrown into an antimagic field: I would use attack and damage as for a non-magical dagger, just because of the abstracted combat rules. The attack roll is a combination of precision and armor penetration. I see magical boni as better armor penetration due to the fact that the bonus enhances the damage, too and this bonus is lost in an AMF.This &quot;armor penetration bonus&quot; comes into effect at the time of the impact. If you think that a magical bonus to hit should be precision based (your aim is improved) you could argue, that the attack roll should recieve the bonus even in an AMF because the bonus comes into effect at the time of the throw (or shot). The damage should never be enhanced by the magical bonus in an AMF IMO. You would get into trouble to justify the enhanced bonus without the weapon being magical at the moment of the impact.Please note that this only logically applies to 3.5 rules where missile weapons give their boni to the ammunition. In 3.0 the above thoughts are brought ad absurdum due to fact that e.g. a +1 longbow gives a bonus of +1 to hit and +1 to damage and this bonus CAN only be given at the time of the shot. So in 3.0 a magical missile weapon should ALWAYS give the bonus to hit and damage (as long as itself is not inside an AMF and therefore it's non-magical).This is just my opinion, YMMV.GreetingsFirzair</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Firzair, post: 1510716, member: 1334"] Hi everybody, this is an interesting discussion. Just to give my two cents, I would allow the interruption of an attack as described above. The damage roll would use the strength bonus at the time of the attack i.e. the throw. This just makes sense as the momentum of the knife was given by the strength at the time of the throw. As for a magical dagger thrown into an antimagic field: I would use attack and damage as for a non-magical dagger, just because of the abstracted combat rules. The attack roll is a combination of precision and armor penetration. I see magical boni as better armor penetration due to the fact that the bonus enhances the damage, too and this bonus is lost in an AMF. This "armor penetration bonus" comes into effect at the time of the impact. If you think that a magical bonus to hit should be precision based (your aim is improved) you could argue, that the attack roll should recieve the bonus even in an AMF because the bonus comes into effect at the time of the throw (or shot). The damage should never be enhanced by the magical bonus in an AMF IMO. You would get into trouble to justify the enhanced bonus without the weapon being magical at the moment of the impact. Please note that this only logically applies to 3.5 rules where missile weapons give their boni to the ammunition. In 3.0 the above thoughts are brought ad absurdum due to fact that e.g. a +1 longbow gives a bonus of +1 to hit and +1 to damage and this bonus CAN only be given at the time of the shot. So in 3.0 a magical missile weapon should ALWAYS give the bonus to hit and damage (as long as itself is not inside an AMF and therefore it's non-magical). This is just my opinion, YMMV. Greetings Firzair [/QUOTE]

Verification