Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dark2112" data-source="post: 1304867" data-attributes="member: 3503">Mkay, I got sidetracked from a link someone sent me, and decided to de-lurk upon reading this wonderful thread. There've been some good points, some bad points, and some random insanity, so I figured this would be a good place for me. I've always wondered something about the critical hit system - why is it biased against certain classes? My reasoning for that question? Here goes!Weapon specialization - take a good look at this feat. They've never really been descriptive of what it really does. I mean, yes, it gives +2 damage with a chosen weapon. Why? Not because it's sharper, or because it's magic, or anything like that. No, it's because the fighter has trained and learned special tricks while using this weapon. What kind of tricks could a fighter learn with a sword that would enable him or her to do more damage? Well, I'm glad you asked. WotC never really specifies in either version of the PHB, but I've come up for something. Get this: they learn how to do extra damage by hitting weaker spots! Fancy that. Think about it for a moment.   ....Ok, so, seems to make sense to me. You train for years learning how to use your weapon to inflict more damage on opponents by exploiting the blade to inflict more damage by either placing your blows more precicely (ie - vital spots, weak/stress points, etc), or by say, twisting the blade when you've run the guy through, tapping things in a series of rapid blows to stress it more rather than a single solid strike, or some such. Essentially, that +2 damage is coming from your victim having some sort of weakness you can exploit with your weapon.So, now to my point. It's not "why are constructs immune to critical hits and sneak attack", although I could say a few things on that particular topic which haven't been said yet. No, my point is something different. Why aren't constructs ALSO immune to weapon specialization damage?This also applies to rangers, although I seem to recall reading something long ago that said that they were in fact immune to the damage bonus provided by the Favored Enemy feature, and everyone I've played with has ruled the same way. Nothing seems to indicate that the ranger should lose the damage bonus, yet they acquire it by 'extensive study of the chosen type of foe and training in the proper techniques for combatting' them.So what's the deal? Why rule out sneak attack (which many have said comes at least partly from a rogue's understanding of vital striking points) and not extra damage from these other abilities? If you're allowing these other forms, does that not imply that these creatures do in fact have at least some weakness, thus meaning that they are in fact susceptable to attacks doing critical damage, if not a 'critical hit'?</blockquote>

Verification