D&D 4E Official Unofficial 4E Rules FAQ

[steppen]

What damage is maximized on a critical hit?
[sblock]Response (Support Agent) 06/10/2008 04:23 PM
Steppen,

You asked the following question:

1. "Rather than roll damage, determine the maximum damage you can roll with your attack." Does this just refer to the damage that the attack/power does? Or does it include other abilities?

The best way to describe this is to say that you "maximize" any damage that was not specifically rolled as the result of a crit. For instance many weapons add damage like 1d6 or 1d10 to damage when you crit. You don't maximize the "extra critical" damage but you do maximize all other damage, including sneak attack damage and all other damages associated with that power or exploit, etc.

For example, if a rogue rolls a crit using the Torturous Strike exploit (Rogue Attack 1), does he just maximize the 2[W] listed in the power... or would he also maximize his Sneak Attack damage (2d6)?

Let's assume a Brutal Scoundrel +3 Vicious Dagger in your example above, with a +3 strength bonus and a +3 dex bonus. Rogue maximizes the following amount:

2(1d4) + 3 str damage (brutal scoundrel) + 3 dex damage + 2d6 sneak attack. So 2(1d4) + 18 damage. When vicious crits it gives +1d12 damage per plus, so with +3 it would be +3d12 damage.

His final damage: 2(1d4) + 18 + 3d12

That simple really![/sblock]

 

[steppen]

Can you voluntarily fail a saving throw?
[sblock]Response (Support Agent) 06/15/2008 04:21 PM
Steppen,

There is currently no rule allowing for a character to voluntarily fail a Saving Throw.

Good Gaming![/sblock]

 

[TimeOut]

Nice, thank you!

 

[Nikosandros]

Then the WotC reps have also said this is how it was intended.

Customer service said that it doesn't work on the paladin. Also, the feat healing hands mentions allies, which exclude the paladin.

 

[Sanzuo]

The best way to describe this is to say that you "maximize" any damage that was not specifically rolled as the result of a crit.

-Snip-

Let's assume a Brutal Scoundrel +3 Vicious Dagger in your example above, with a +3 strength bonus and a +3 dex bonus. Rogue maximizes the following amount:

2(1d4) + 3 str damage (brutal scoundrel) + 3 dex damage + 2d6 sneak attack. So 2(1d4) + 18 damage. When vicious crits it gives +1d12 damage per plus, so with +3 it would be +3d12 damage.

His final damage: 2(1d4) + 18 + 3d12

Woa woa woa. It looks like in that example he's not maximizing the weapon damage at all for the critical hit, just the sneak attack damage. According to what he just said, shouldn't it be more like: 26 + 3d12?

 

[Xfer83]

That cant be right. Not maxing the vicious is right. Maxing the Sneak Attack is questionable. Not maxing the base weapon damage is nonsensical. What if the attack in question was a critical with a non-magical dagger on a non sneak attack. Would nothing get maxed?

 

[Sanzuo]

Yea, it seems he's broken the mold of contradicting other CSRs and instead decided to contradict himself.

 

[Otterscrubber]

That cant be right. Not maxing the vicious is right. Maxing the Sneak Attack is questionable. Not maxing the base weapon damage is nonsensical. What if the attack in question was a critical with a non-magical dagger on a non sneak attack. Would nothing get maxed?

From what I understand the only dice that get maximized are the base weapon damage dice. If there are any other dice to be rolled, such as extra dice from it being a magic weapon or sneak attack, those are all rolled normally. It seems pretty clear.

 

[Sanzuo]

From what I understand the only dice that get maximized are the base weapon damage dice. If there are any other dice to be rolled, such as extra dice from it being a magic weapon or sneak attack, those are all rolled normally. It seems pretty clear.

Ya, up till now I assumed that's how it worked.

 

[Xfer83]

From what I understand the only dice that get maximized are the base weapon damage dice. If there are any other dice to be rolled, such as extra dice from it being a magic weapon or sneak attack, those are all rolled normally. It seems pretty clear.

I agree, which is why I find the above cust-serv answer particularly troubling on several levels. I suppose this will lead me to be more skeptical of the veracity of cust-serv responses.