Vorpal Crits

[Lurker37]

Guys, please. We have two camps.

Camp A says Crits trigger vorpal on the [w]

Camp B says they don't.

Neither side is convincing the other.

Here's the closest we've had to an official answer so far:

Response (Support Agent)06/24/2008 05:24 PM

All the damage you would have dealt if the attack was not critical hit is dealt and all dice rolls are considered to be the maximum possible roll, then you roll any damage that is triggered because you rolled a critical hit like that from a magic weapon.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.


We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.


Chuck

Close, but not definitive. I seem to be having trouble logging into customer service, so can someone please send the question to them, and while you're at it include the vorpal daily weapon and Hunter's Quarry for good measure?

 

[hong]

No, it is not, and just because you say so doesn't help your case.

It says determine damage. It clearly says don't roll damage.

Of course it says don't roll damage, because there is no point to physically rolling the dice if you're going to ignore the result.

Nothing implies that you treated it as if you had rolled maximum on the dice itself besides an assumption.

"Rolling the dice" can be taken to mean either "read a number off the random number generator that looks like a polyhedral thingy", or "pick up those polyhedral thingies and drop them on the table, preferably after imparting some forward momentum" depending on context. That context is clear.

It does treat it as a getting the max result on a damage roll, but that's not what vorpal triggers off of.

That is what vorpal triggers off.

 

[DLichen]

Of course it says don't roll damage, because there is no point to physically rolling the dice if you're going to ignore the result.



"Rolling the dice" can be taken to mean either "read a number off the random number generator that looks like a polyhedral thingy", or "pick up those polyhedral thingies and drop them on the table, preferably after imparting some forward momentum" depending on context. That context is clear.



That is what vorpal triggers off.

Reading a number off a random number generator is not the same as getting the maximum number the random number generator can calculate.

Programming example, I have an RNG[0,10] I don't have to invoke it to know that the highest number I can get is a 10.

Vorpal triggers off of you calling the RNG and getting a 10 result, not just going the highest I can get out of that RNG is 10.

[Edit: I guess this was a lie] This is going to be my last post in the topic because it honestly isn't worth talking about at this point.

 

[hong]

Programming example, I have an RNG[0,10] I don't have to invoke it to know that the highest number I can get is a 10.

Precisely. Hence trying to take the "rather than rolling the die..." bit too literally isn't very productive.

Vorpal triggers off of you calling the RNG and getting a 10 result, not just going the highest I can get out of that RNG is 10.

No, vorpal triggers off getting a 10.

It really is that simple. There's no reason to complicate matters further.

 

[DLichen]

Yes, because when a rule statement goes against what you want to happen, it's too literal and should just be ignored.

RAW is RAW because it's what is written. If you claim that RAI is different, fine, but you can't argue RAW by ignoring passages.

 

[hong]

Whew. Onwards to page 11!

Yes, because when a rule statement goes against what you want to happen, it's too literal and should just be ignored.

Naturally. This is what allowed ppl to ignore bags of rats in 3E, for example.

RAW is RAW because it's what is written. If you claim that RAI is different, fine, but you can't argue RAW by ignoring passages.

The trick is to realise there is another RA that trumps RAW and RAI, and that is Rules As Used.

 

[DLichen]

Excuse me, we must have clearly fallen into the house rules forum at some point.

My bad.

If you wish to ignore things, you are free to do so.

 

[Zsig]

Naturally. This is what allowed ppl to ignore bags of rats in 3E, for example.

Except that, this time, you're the one creating the bag of rats where it doesn't exist.

 

[hong]

Except that, this time, you're the one creating the bag of rats where it doesn't exist.

Hm? I fail to see any bag of rats in allowing vorpal to trigger off crits.

 

[Caliban]

"Rolling the dice" can be taken to mean either "read a number off the random number generator that looks like a polyhedral thingy", or "pick up those polyhedral thingies and drop them on the table, preferably after imparting some forward momentum" depending on context. That context is clear.

Of course, neither of those things happen when you crit. Rather than do either of those things, you just use the maximum possible pre-crit value. No randomness involved.

I've don't really understood what your point is in this arguement. I really don't see how you get "read a number off the dice without rolling them" from "Roll the dice".

Sorry Hong.