# Vorpal Crits



## erik_the_guy (Jun 24, 2008)

Vorpal Weapons:

When you role maximum weapon damage with a vorpal weapon you get to re-roll and that die and add more damage (keep re-rolling if you keep rolling max damage). If you get a critical, you treat each weapon damage die as though it had been rolled max, would your re-roll those ones and add more?

Ex, you attack with a 5[W] attack power and score a critical. You would use max weapon damage 5 times, and roll weapon damage 5 times (and re-roll any more that were max and so on...) right?

Love the new rules for vorpal by the way


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

Yes, I believe so. Vorpal has always meant nasty things happen on a crit.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 24, 2008)

If you want a truly nasty Vorpal weapon, try a Glaive on for size with some Gauntlets of Destruction. 2d4, reroll 1's, open ended rolls on 4's? Yes please.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

In a word: No

Vorpal:
Whenever you *roll* the maximum result on any damage
die for this weapon, roll that die again and add the additional
result to the damage total. If a reroll results in another
maximum damage result, roll it again and keep adding.

Critical:
*Rather than roll damage*,
determine the maximum damage you can roll with
your attack. This is your critical damage.

If you want vorpal to be nuts, grab a falchion and gauntlets of destruction. Now there's a combo.

Falchion is better than glaive because of high crit: when you crit you roll 3[w] extra damage - these 3[w] = 6d4 which gets maximized and repeated from vorpal = awesome


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> In a word: No
> 
> Vorpal:
> Whenever you *roll* the maximum result on any damage
> ...



 How do the 6d4 get maximised and repeated if your answer is "no"?


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 24, 2008)

'cos you get extra dice from high crit


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

Danceofmasks said:
			
		

> 'cos you get extra dice from high crit



 Yes, but you roll those dice, they're not automatically maxed on a crit.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 24, 2008)

Ah, I misunderstood you ..
but I think the post you responded to meant you want to roll those dice, and if they get a max result, roll again as per the vorpal property.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Yes, but you roll those dice, they're not automatically maxed on a crit.




Because of this rule:

Extra Damage: Magic weapons and implements, as
well as high crit weapons, can increase the damage
you deal when you score a critical hit. If this extra
damage is a die roll, it’s not automatically maximum
damage; you add the result of the roll.

The high crit damage is extra damage, but afaik, it is still subject to the vorpal property.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Because of this rule:
> 
> Extra Damage: Magic weapons and implements, as
> well as high crit weapons, can increase the damage
> ...



 Exactly. you don't maximise them.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Exactly. you don't maximise them.




Ah, I get you, I meant maximize as maximized utility from gloves of destruction and vorpal, not literally maxed as in being critical.

I should be more careful in a rules forum, my bad.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

Dlichen, you are wrong on your critical damage reading.  Under your reading you would not add feat, enhancement, or other damage bonuses to hit on a critical either since you are only allowed to add those bonuses to damage rolls (PHB 276).  With a critical hit the maximized result becomes a proxy roll.  With a vorpal weapon that means you get one "free" max roll and then get to roll the dice to see if you can continue the damage.

For plain game terms, under your ruling a Dwarven Fighter with an 18 Str, Wielding two hand axes +2 with TWF, and the Dwarf Weapon Training Feat would only do 10 points of damage (6 from hand axe + 4 for strength mod) versus the 15 points that the book states you would get (6 from axe, +4 str, +1 TWF, +2 DWT, +2 enhancement) on a critical hit.

Since the example on a critical hit (PHB 276) clearly supports the former, critical hits are a proxied damage roll.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Dlichen, you are wrong on your critical damage reading.  Under your reading you would not add feat, enhancement, or other damage bonuses to hit on a critical either since you are only allowed to add those bonuses to damage rolls (PHB 276).  With a critical hit the maximized result becomes a proxy roll.  With a vorpal weapon that means you get one "free" max roll and then get to roll the dice to see if you can continue the damage.
> 
> For plain game terms, under your ruling a Dwarven Fighter with an 18 Str, Wielding two hand axes +2 with TWF, and the Dwarf Weapon Training Feat would only do 10 points of damage (6 from hand axe + 4 for strength mod) versus the 15 points that the book states you would get (6 from axe, +4 str, +1 TWF, +2 DWT, +2 enhancement) on a critical hit.
> 
> Since the example on a critical hit (PHB 276) clearly supports the former, critical hits are a proxied damage roll.




Damage rolls are clearly defined in the rules to include feat, weapon, and power bonuses. The vorpal rule clearly refers to physically rolling the dice and not the actual damage roll.

In your intepretation, the maximum damage of a vorpal damage weapon is infinite since each max dice results in another max dice. While it fits with 3e vorpal, it also negates the xd12 bonus damage on a critical, so it clearly is the wrong definition.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Damage rolls are clearly defined in the rules to include feat, weapon, and power bonuses. The vorpal rule clearly refers to physically rolling the dice and not the actual damage roll.




No, it clearly refers to damage from the weapon, whether that's physically rolled or not.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

> In your intepretation, the maximum damage of a vorpal damage weapon is infinite since each max dice results in another max dice. While it fits with 3e vorpal, it also negates the xd12 bonus damage on a critical, so it clearly is the wrong definition.




No because any dice after the initial roll are EXTRA DICE, only the initial roll is maximized on a critical hit, after that you must roll the dice, so in the example I gave above the Dwarf would do 15+1d6 damage with a Vorpal Axe (even though +2 Vorpaals don't exist) if a 6 is rolled then roll again.

Read PHB 276 again, critical hits clearly include feat, weapon, and power bonuses; things that can ONLY be applied on a damage roll.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 24, 2008)

You know, strangely I think everyone here is saying exactly the same thing, but think the others are saying something else.


----------



## WhatGravitas (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> In your intepretation, the maximum damage of a vorpal damage weapon is infinite since each max dice results in another max dice.



...and? What's the problem with this?

Cheers, LT.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> No, it clearly refers to damage from the weapon, whether that's physically rolled or not.




No, not at all.

Nowhere in:

_Whenever you roll the maximum result on any *damage
die* for this weapon, roll that die again and add the additional
result to the damage total. If a reroll results in another
maximum damage result, roll it again and keep adding._

Critical damage is not rolled on die. Damage roll is a rules term clearly defined on page 276.

Critical hits even specifically say that rather than roll damage, you just do the maximum.

There is 0 wriggle room on this, it is completely unambigious.



			
				Lord Tirian said:
			
		

> ...and? What's the problem with this?
> 
> Cheers, LT.




Critical hits automatically do maximum damage. If maximum damage is infinite, and critical hits on a vorpal weapon do infinite damage, why do vorpal weapons add d12s to a critical hit?


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> _Whenever you roll the maximum result on any *damage
> die* for this weapon, roll that die again and add the additional
> result to the damage total. If a reroll results in another
> maximum damage result, roll it again and keep adding._
> ...




Yes. You just need to take the "roll" bit less literally.



> Critical hits even specifically say that rather than roll damage, you just do the maximum.




Exactly. You do everything else exactly the same as for a normal hit. It is a normal hit, except you omit the "roll" bit, and thus you apply vorpal to it.



> There is 0 wriggle room on this, it is completely unambigious.




That's what they always say.



> Critical hits automatically do maximum damage. If maximum damage is infinite, and critical hits on a vorpal weapon do infinite damage, why do vorpal weapons add d12s to a critical hit?




To add to the expected damage, of course.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

Dlichen since you clearly want to "Stick to your guns" even when wrong, please explain the following:



> Example: Valenae. a 12th-level eladrin paladin,
> hits a foe with thunder smite. The attack deals 2[W] +
> Strength modifier thunder damage and knocks the
> target prone. The damage would be 2d8 (longsword’s
> ...




IF you are taking :


> DAMAGE ROLLS
> ✦ Roll the damage indicated in the power description.
> If you’re using a weapon for the attack, the damage is
> some multiple of your weapon damage dice.
> ...



literally, then how does the paladin in the example get a critical damage result of 23?

Critical hit = maximum damage rolled on dice.  Vorpal weapon = maximum damage is rolled on a die take result add roll of die to damage, rinse and repeat.  However, critical damage ONLY applies to the initial dice rolled, any extra dice which are granted are not maximized, the critical damage "roll" is resolved before you roll any "maximum RESULT" rerolls for the vorpal ability.

The wording on critical hit just was easier than stating "roll damage until you get maximum".  The way it should have been stated was "your damage roll is maximized" rather than throwing in that "instead" word.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Dlichen since you clearly want to "Stick to your guns" even when wrong, please explain the following:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




8+8+3+2+2 = 23?

Then the paladin has a 2d6 extra thunder damage that is not maximized because it is extra critical hit damage.

For final damage of 23+2d6

I'm not sure where the problem is.

Just so we're in agreement -> when a vorpal weapon is critted, you DO NOT roll extra die for the the autocritted weapon dice because you didn't roll them, and vorpal clearly refer to ROLLING damage DIE, which critical hit rule specifically says to NOT ROLL. Vorpal rules does not mention the damage roll at all.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

The problem is you cannot add:


> ✦ Racial or feat bonuses
> ✦ An enhancement bonus (usually from a magic
> weapon or an implement)
> ✦ An item bonus
> ...



unless you make a DAMAGE ROLL.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

I think it's fairly clear what the intended meaning is, given how vorpal weapons have always been (near) instakills in previous editions of D&D.

Normal hit:
1. roll [w]
2. if max, goto 1
3. add up

Critical hit:
1. start with maximum dmg
2. roll [w]
3. if max, goto 2
4. roll 1d12
5. if max, goto 4
6 repeat 4-5 6 times, once for each plus
7. add up


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> The problem is you cannot add:
> 
> unless you make a DAMAGE ROLL.




Yes, that is correct.

Vorpal never mentions damage roll at all, only damage DIE.

When a critical hit maxes the damage roll, you never rolled any damage die, and thus vorpal does not trigger.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> I think it's fairly clear what the intended meaning is, given how vorpal weapons have always been (near) instakills in previous editions of D&D.
> 
> Normal hit:
> 1. roll [w]
> ...




There is nothing in the rules that suggest you roll [w] again after getting max damage. Unless you can pull quotes, I remain opposed.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> There is nothing in the rules that suggest you roll [w] again after getting max damage.




In the bit where if you roll the maximum result on the damage die, you roll again, of course.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> In the bit where if you roll the maximum result on the damage die, you roll again, of course.




But you never rolled the max result on damage die, the die got automatically maxed in the resolution of the critical hit.

Critical hits specifically says:

Maximum Damage: Rather than roll damage,
determine the maximum damage you can roll with
your attack. This is your critical damage. (Attacks
that don’t deal damage still don’t deal damage on a
critical hit.)

Rather than roll damage, you just straight up calculate it.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> But you never rolled the max result on damage die, the die got automatically maxed in the resolution of the critical hit.




Right. You obtained the damage from the damage die, and thus you rolled it, using the plain-English vernacular meaning of "roll the die" to mean "get a reading from a random number generator which happens to look like a polyhedral thingy". You just happened to get the maximum result automatically because it was a crit.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

Wrong again Dlichen, you are good at being wrong, hopefully you get paid to do it:



> CRITICAL HIT DAMAGE
> ✦ Natural 20: If you roll a 20 on the die when making
> an attack roll, you score a critical hit if your total
> attack roll is high enough to hit your target’s defense.
> ...




Hong's flowchart is correct if you replace [W] with die and resolve all die for steps 2-3 before you go to 4.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Right, so what are we arguing about again?

Let's be clear, when we roll a crit with a vorpal weapon:

1. 20 yay
2. I am using a vorpal longsword +6 so I deal 2[w] being epic for 16+6+whatever misc bonuses
3. I then get my final result and add 6d12 to the roll

DONE

I do not roll 2 more d8s because I rolled maximum on two die I didn't actually roll.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

Yes you do, since it was the maximum you could roll.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Right, so what are we arguing about again?
> 
> Let's be clear, when we roll a crit with a vorpal weapon:
> 
> ...



 No, this is what you do on a crit:

Critical hit:
1. start with 16+6
2. roll [2w]
3. if max, goto 2
4. roll 1d12
5. if max, goto 4
6 repeat 4-5 6 times, once for each plus
7. add up


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

Onwards to 4 pages!


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Yes you do, since it was the maximum you could roll.




Ok, now we get to the heart of the issue.

Does vorpal trigger when you deal max on a damage roll only or do you have to roll the dice.

I argue that just because you dealt damage as though you rolled maximum on the dice does not imply that you actually rolled the dice.

The key word there is DETERMINE, the wording does not imply that you carry on as though you rolled maximum damage or that it triggers vorpal's ability.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> No, this is what you do on a crit:
> 
> Critical hit:
> 1. start with 16+6
> ...





Reposting your flow chart does not clear anything up at all. Why would you roll [2w] when vorpal didn't trigger because you didn't roll damage die?

Vorpal is explicit in that you must roll damage die to get bonus die, whereas crit says you determine how much damage you can do without rolling.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Reposting your flow chart does not clear anything up at all. Why would you roll [2w] when vorpal didn't trigger because you didn't roll damage die?




It triggers because you did. You just happened to get the maximum result.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> It triggers because you did. You just happened to get the maximum result.




Why would you assume you did?

*Rather than roll damage*,
determine the maximum damage you can roll with
your attack. This is your critical damage.

Why would it clearly say "rather than roll damage" there? Determine the maximum damage you can roll does not imply that you actually rolled the damage, just that you did the max possible.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Why would you assume you did?




By using the plain-English vernacular meaning of "roll the die" to mean "get a reading from a random number generator which happens to look like a polyhedral thingy". You just happened to get the maximum result automatically because it was a crit.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> By using the plain-English vernacular meaning of "roll the die" to mean "get a reading from a random number generator which happens to look like a polyhedral thingy". You just happened to get the maximum result automatically because it was a crit.




The problem is that it says maximum damage you *can* roll with your attack.

Unless english is significantly different where you're from, just because you can do something doesn't mean you actually did it.

I can roll a max of 6 on a d6, I don't need to roll a dice to find that out.


----------



## Obryn (Jun 24, 2008)

I am 95% sure there was another thread here regarding whether or not a crit counts as "rolling" damage.

I wish I could remember where, but IIRC you got some nonsensical results if you didn't consider a critical damage to be "rolled."

-O


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Obryn said:
			
		

> I am 95% sure there was another thread here regarding whether or not a crit counts as "rolling" damage.
> 
> I wish I could remember where, but IIRC you got some nonsensical results if you didn't consider a critical damage to be "rolled."
> 
> -O




Could you enlighten me?


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> The problem is that it says maximum damage you *can* roll with your attack.
> 
> Unless english is significantly different where you're from, just because you can do something doesn't mean you actually did it.
> 
> I can roll a max of 6 on a d6, I don't need to roll a dice to find that out.



 Yes, it is true that "roll a die" does not necessarily mean you physically pick up the random number generator shaped like a polyhedral thingy. Nevertheless, the meaning is clear from context.


----------



## Bandreus (Jun 24, 2008)

Guys you're just trying to break the game.

Critical hits get weapon damage maximized, thus you calculate the highest damage you could roll with your attack, then take it as fixed damage. no roll. You can call that a damage roll or whatever you want, but the maximized damage does not include a die roll, it's, well, fixed (so no vorpal effect on it). Then you roll any EXTRA criticall damage (wich is effected by vorpal).

Now what? You give a vorpal weapon to a minion monster, then since minions always do fixed damage, the minion makes infinite damage with a vorpal just becouse you don't roll any dice, but you call it a damage roll anyway?

please, so lame.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

Bandreus said:
			
		

> Guys you're just trying to break the game.
> 
> Critical hits get weapon damage maximized, thus you calculate the highest damage you could roll with your attack, then take it as fixed damage. no roll. You can call that a damage roll or whatever you want, but the maximized damage does not include a die roll, it's, well, fixed (so no vorpal effect on it). Then you roll any EXTRA criticall damage (wich is effected by vorpal).
> 
> ...



 ... why would you give a vorpal sword to a minion?


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Yes, it is true that "roll a die" does not necessarily mean you physically pick up the random number generator shaped like a polyhedral thingy. Nevertheless, the meaning is clear from context.




Honestly, that makes no sense.

What's the highest you can roll on a d8? An 8

What's the highest you can roll on a d20? A 20

Are you going to say I rolled those dice because I determined the highest number I can roll on them? Please, that doesn't even begin to make sense. Repeating myself is getting really old at this point.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jun 24, 2008)

I don't understand why people are saying "no"
This would make the Vorpal weapon potentially more effective when you do not roll a critical strike. 
Does anyone remember a couple months ago, when 3.x was still arround and Vorpal weapons KILLED the end?
I believe it is the intent of the Vorpal weapon to automatically do its maximum damage, then roll the extra bucket of dice as bonus damage (As per "Additional damage rules" (The page number escapes me).

I know I for one do not ever want to utter the words "Can I please choose to not use this natural 20 as a critical strike please, please, please?"


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Lord Xtheth said:
			
		

> I don't understand why people are saying "no"
> This would make the Vorpal weapon potentially more effective when you do not roll a critical strike.
> Does anyone remember a couple months ago, when 3.x was still arround and Vorpal weapons KILLED the end?
> I believe it is the intent of the Vorpal weapon to automatically do its maximum damage, then roll the extra bucket of dice as bonus damage (As per "Additional damage rules" (The page number escapes me).
> ...




That's not true at all, since you can still potientially max the 6 extra critical hit dice you get, not to mention the extra damage die from high crit weapons.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

Onwards to page 5!


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 24, 2008)

Well, scythes can be vorpal and isn't high crit .. so those exploding [W] dice (from say, a 5+[W] attack) have a fair whack at being > 6 exploding D12s


----------



## Bandreus (Jun 24, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> ... why would you give a vorpal sword to a minion?




because a minion with a vorpal (given your reading of the rules) would do infinite damage on a normal hit, not only on critical ones. minions don't roll damage, they just do fixed damage. since that's fixed damage, its the max damage they can deal, any given damage roll is max, so they keep on rolling their "max" damage with a vorpal.

now this is extreme.
vorpal is supposed to be nasty, not to roll X[w] more dice than usual on a crit. you just determine damage and roll dice normally, it just happens whenever you phisicaly roll max damage on a die, you reroll and add up.


----------



## hong (Jun 24, 2008)

Bandreus said:
			
		

> because a minion with a vorpal (given your reading of the rules) would do infinite damage on a normal hit, not only on critical ones.




... so, why would you give a vorpal sword to a minion?


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

You're going to make me do statistics aren't you? AREN'T YOU? Let's use a

Alright, for the sake of argument you make a 5[w] attack for an average of 5[2d4] = 10d4

Rolling damage you get [10*2.5]  = 22.5, then you get a an expected 2 and a half exploding die which adds 6.25 damage.

28.75 <<<<< 40

The number is probably a bit on the low side but I severely doubt even you're going to get enough rerolls to make a noncrit better than a crit on average.

You'll have to get lucky with dice and use gauntlets of destruction to make noncrits better than crits.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

Bandreus said:
			
		

> Guys you're just trying to break the game.
> 
> Critical hits get weapon damage maximized, thus you calculate the highest damage you could roll with your attack, then take it as fixed damage. no roll. You can call that a damage roll or whatever you want, but the maximized damage does not include a die roll, it's, well, fixed (so no vorpal effect on it). Then you roll any EXTRA criticall damage (wich is effected by vorpal).
> 
> ...




Only thing lame is your logic.  Fixed damage can't be maximized, since it is fixed.  

If you don't make a damage roll you don't add in any additional bonuses, period.  Crits clearly show in every example in the PHB that you do add bonuses to crits and they trigger additional effects.  There is no way to get maximum damage result without maximum rolls.

If you "do the math", a vorpal on a crit will average to do about *1.5 more damage than a non-vorpal crit using identical weapons, that's hardly game breaking.

What Dlich is proposing is to make the vorpal property useless on an attack roll of a 1 (since you miss) and a roll of 20 (since you crit),


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 24, 2008)

Lol ... I didn't say it was likely, I said you have a fair whack.
Not that if you're going to buy a level 30 vorpal weapon you'd even bat an eyelid at it not being a falchion, but ... the point is moot.
Sooner or later, some guy (irregardless of actual odds) is going to make his 7[W] attack and say, "please not be a crit, please not be a crit" to his dice.

And why wouldn't you use gauntlets?
I thought that's the point of the silly combo ..


----------



## kclark (Jun 24, 2008)

But in every other form of attack it is impossible for a non critical hit to be better than a critical hit. Ever. So that leads me to think it should stay that way for vorpal weapons too. Thus in my games you get to roll your weapon damage again after a crit.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Only thing lame is your logic.  Fixed damage can't be maximized, since it is fixed.
> 
> If you don't make a damage roll you don't add in any additional bonuses, period.  Crits clearly show in every example in the PHB that you do add bonuses to crits and they trigger additional effects.  There is no way to get maximum damage result without maximum rolls.
> 
> ...




No, because fixed damage equal to calculated max does not imply maximized fixed.

Seriously, get some quotes on the book out, this is a farce. If you want to play vorpals the other way, fine, but the rules are quite clear on how they are meant to be played.

@gaunts of destruction

I don't want to do the math to actually find out the average damage on it, but it's still not going to do more damage on a noncrit than on a crit.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> If you don't make a damage roll you don't add in any additional bonuses, period.  Crits clearly show in every example in the PHB that you do add bonuses to crits and they trigger additional effects.  There is no way to get maximum damage result without maximum rolls.




If you want to say things like these, bring the quotes or page numbers. Otherwise, I have no way to verify what you are saying.

I don't think there is another property in the PHB that even cares about maxed rolls other than vorpal, let alone it being in every case.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

Dlich, when I don't quote you I'm not calling you names, second calling someone's logic lame is not calling names either.  (English really isn't your primary language is it?)

I've quoted the book until I'm blue in the face, somehow you want to say that Damage = 5 is the same as 2[W]+ Str. mods which happens to be a crit are both fixed damage, but the rules clearly both state and imply they are not.

Your math in the example above proves how not broken RAW with Vorpal is, you would do 68 instead of 40 points of damage, I'd say that is a decent damage boost for an end game weapon.

The rules are quite clear, but you don't want to play by the rules, you want to play in Dlichenland where maximized rolls are not rolls.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Dlich, when I don't quote you I'm not calling you names, second calling someone's logic lame is not calling names either.  (English really isn't your primary language is it?)
> 
> I've quoted the book until I'm blue in the face, somehow you want to say that Damage = 5 is the same as 2[W]+ Str. mods which happens to be a crit are both fixed damage, but the rules clearly both state and imply they are not.
> 
> ...




What?

In your example it's clearly 2[w] + 7 where the 7 is 3 stat + 2 feat + 2 weapon

For 2[1d8] + 7 fpr 2[8] + 7 = 23 damage.

Proving something not broken or not does not affect how it works in the rules at all. And stop making snide insinuations like you just did, please refrain from insults if you can't discuss things like an adult.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

phb 276:


> DAMAGE ROLLS
> ✦ Roll the damage indicated in the power description.
> If you’re using a weapon for the attack, the damage is
> some multiple of your weapon damage dice.
> ...




Note if you don't roll damage then you don't get to apply any of the latter.  (Reason you don't add any of the latter to Cleave secondary damage)

PHB 278:


> CRITICAL HIT DAMAGE
> ✦ Natural 20: If you roll a 20 on the die when making
> an attack roll, you score a critical hit if your total
> attack roll is high enough to hit your target’s defense.
> ...




PHB 236


> Property: Whenever you roll the maximum result on any damage
> die for this weapon, roll that die again and add the additional
> result to the damage total. If a reroll results in another
> maximum damage result, roll it again and keep adding.




Just to let the blue out...


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

You seem to think just because critical hits imply a maxed damage roll result, means that physical dice were rolled. That is not the case.

As you have pointed out, a damage roll is weapon die + bonuses.

When you get a crit, you maximize the damage roll. What does that mean? You get the maximum possible of damage die + bonuses.

There is a logical leap from getting the best results and actually rolling the physical dice to get those results. In fact, critical hits says the exact opposite. You take damage roll, and see that [2d8] is 16 damage and add it to your bonuses.

Vorpal makes no mention of damage roll, only damage die. You can get a damage roll result without rolling damage physically using dice, through determination alone. YOU ROLLED NO DICE but there is still a damage roll.

Damage Roll is a game term separate from rolling damage since it explicitly has its own section in the rules.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> @gaunts of destruction
> 
> I don't want to do the math to actually find out the average damage on it, but it's still not going to do more damage on a noncrit than on a crit.




Well, without the vorpal property, gauntlets on a 2D4 weapon is simply average 3 per die rather than 2.5.
10D4 = average 30.
with a 7[W], average = 42

Then you throw in the exploding dice ..
1/3 of your D4s explode, they add an average of 3 with a recurring 1/3 chance of exploding ..
using 10D4, there will be an extra (approximately) 4.5 * 3 over 30, which is 43.5.

However, those D12s may also explode and are subject to the gauntlets' effect, so average of 6D12 is over 50.

Reckon 7[W] on a non-high-crit vorpal weapon with gauntlets > 6D12 bonus from critting.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Being that this really only affects glaives, I don't think this whole thing is worth the uproar.

Houserule it if necessary, but the RAW is clear.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

> You seem to think just because critical hits imply a maxed damage roll result, means that physical dice were rolled. That is not the case.




And you seem to think that you can magically get an 8 damage with a longsword without a 1d8 to determine damage.  8 is the maximum damage a longsword can do by itself.  You don't have to physically roll anything in the game, you can use a random number generator with constraints and get legitimate dice rolls, and when you tell the program to maximize it, it treats it as if it had "rolled" an 8.

Maximum damage without a variable reference is not maximum damage.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 24, 2008)

Hey, I'm in the you don't get rerolls on the [W]s camp, I just think it's funny.
Also affects scythes, btw ... simple weapon that can be vorpal.
Silly, but some clerics might use it for fluff reasons .. but then clerics don't have many uber #[W] attacks.

edit: I take it back. Apparently they get a 6[W] and a 7[W] attack.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> And you seem to think that you can magically get an 8 damage with a longsword without a 1d8 to determine damage.  8 is the maximum damage a longsword can do by itself.  You don't have to physically roll anything in the game, you can use a random number generator with constraints and get legitimate dice rolls, and when you tell the program to maximize it, it treats it as if it had "rolled" an 8.
> 
> Maximum damage without a variable reference is not maximum damage.




A variable reference does not mean dice is rolled. The max on a 1d8 is 8, you clearly don't need to roll the dice. The fact that there is a dice 1d8 is enough of a reference.

When something clearly says "Do not roll" it means roll the dice right?


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Danceofmasks said:
			
		

> Hey, I'm in the you don't get rerolls on the [W]s camp, I just think it's funny.
> Also affects scythes, btw ... simple weapon that can be vorpal.
> Silly, but some clerics might use it for fluff reasons .. but then clerics don't have many uber #[W] attacks.
> 
> edit: I take it back. Apparently they get a 6[W] and a 7[W] attack.




Haha, poor scythe clerics.

If anybody deserves a houserule, it's those poor guys.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Haha, poor scythe clerics.
> 
> If anybody deserves a houserule, it's those poor guys.



No, no .. I don't think they do ...
"Godstrike!"
"Your God seems to have spoken, and given you a crit!"
"But .. I do less damage this way!"
"Your God seems to have spoken, and reckons you should have taken Weapon Proficiency (Falchion)!"


----------



## Vempyre (Jun 24, 2008)

I don't get why many of you guys purposefully ignore that bit of text in the book while debating vorpal weapons criticals :



> Maximum Damage: *Rather than* roll damage, determine the maximum damage you can roll




It is a clear case of ppl ignoring a bit of text that goes against what they "think" is right even though they are trying to debate "RAW". So all arguments that are based on "rolling" the criticals are moot because the criticals are not rolls, even though we do add bonus dmg to it like feats n such, unlike ongoing dmg or fixed dmg like cleave.

*Rather than* :
-adverb
rather than,  instead of
_Tutoring is provided by older students rather than teachers. Rather than complain, you should try to make changes._

Now if you want to make the vorpal weapon even more dangerous than written and do MAX+ROLL+EXTRA CRIT DICE instead of MAX+EXTRA CRIT DICE, go ahead. I am not the DM who will have to cope with a weapon more dangerous than it's intended lvl anyway so knock yourselves out.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Vempyre said:
			
		

> I don't get why many of you guys purposefully ignore that bit of text in the book while debating vorpal weapons criticals :
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Did you just define a phrase with the same phrase?

Best Dictionary Ever


----------



## Vempyre (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Did you just define a phrase with the same phrase?
> 
> Best Dictionary Ever




The last part is an example not a definition, hehe

Edit : but yea, some dictionaries are better than others. But we all know what "rather than" means and what's it's used for. We don't really need a dictionary for that as it's a very common usage.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

Vempyyre, that is fine, just make sure not to add feat, enhancement, power, unnamed or any other types of bonuses to critical hit damage either, in otherwords you are saying the examples given in the PHB are all wrong when they give out critical damage.

In this case, "rather than" means, "rather than waste 2 hours of your life rolling until you get maximum damage on the dice..."


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

I have no idea where you're coming from besides pure stubborness.

Damage roll is clearly completely separate from rolling damage. Stop trying to ignore parts of the rules you don't like.


----------



## Rel (Jun 24, 2008)

I'd hate to see the tempers in this thread flare to the point of somebody getting banned.  I mean normally that would be fine but I'm in a really good mood today.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

> Damage roll is clearly completely separate from rolling damage.




Classic.  Next you'll be telling us that "I sit in a chair" and "Sitting in a chair" are clearly completely seperate.


----------



## melkoriii (Jun 24, 2008)

I read it like this

On a Crit Max the [W] add stat+feat+other
Roll bonus die from Vorpal (6d12) and from Feats or High Crit weapon stat
If a die comes up max roll it again.

THen add all the damage together for your total.

ex.

Vorpal Falchion (2d4) with Str +3 and Crit Feat (+1d10)
Crit on a 2[W] power  =

16+3 = 19
Roll 6d12 reroll any max die
Roll 1d10 reroll if max
Roll 1[W] from High Crit and reroll any max die

add the rolls to 19 = total damage


----------



## Caliban (Jun 24, 2008)

melkoriii said:
			
		

> I read it like this
> 
> On a Crit Max the [W] add stat+feat+other
> Roll bonus die from Vorpal (6d12) and from Feats or High Crit weapon stat
> ...




That's the way I read it as well.


----------



## fedelas (Jun 24, 2008)

somebody asked wotc customer service?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 24, 2008)

So here's my question.

Let's assume for the moment that hong and Andur are correct - the [W] dice maximised by the critical are considered to have been rolled, and thus trigger the Property line in Vorpal.

We 'roll' our initial 2d8, and due to the magic of criticals, they both come up 8.  Property kicks in, and we get to roll another 2d8.

The results of these dice are added to the damage total, and they are not "damage as the result of a critical hit" - I'd have gotten to roll these two dice again whether or not I'd rolled a critical, as long as they came up 8s.  Since they are not "damage as the result of a critical", they are subject to maximising effect of the critical, and they both come up 8s.  Which means Vorpal kicks in again, and I get to roll 2d8 again, and I get two more 8s.

Result?  Just like in 3E, a critical with a Vorpal weapon kills, since the critical deals the maximum possible result - infinite damage - plus 6d12.

-Hyp.


----------



## Branduil (Jun 24, 2008)

I find it a bit ironic that 4e was supposed to simplify criticals when it seems they are more complicated than ever when you try to maximize their potential.


----------



## Andur (Jun 24, 2008)

Hyper, no, because you only apply critical damage to the initial dice.  The vorpal description states you may reroll when the damage result for a die is maximized, the critical damage (auto max) is only applied to the initial "roll".  



> On a Crit Max the [W] add stat+feat+other



If you do that then you acknowledge that a damage roll has taken place, in which max damage is applied for all variable effects, you can only add anything after stat if it is a damage roll.

Losing the bulk of a level 30 epic weapon everytime you crit does not seem to be the intent, nor good game design.  As Dlichen has pointed out, using 2d4 weapon will only increase the damage 50-60% on a crit using the vorpal properties.


----------



## melkoriii (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> If you do that then you acknowledge that a damage roll has taken place, in which max damage is applied for all variable effects, you can only add anything after stat if it is a damage roll.





No x[W] is not a roll.  It is stating what the damage will be.

2d4 is also not a roll.  It is also stating what the damage will be.

You use this information to derive the damage total.  
That could be a roll, that could be a auto max, that could be an auto min.

It seems that you are just being stubborn about a rule that many have shown you how the RAW is.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (Jun 24, 2008)

I'm not understanding this "infinite damage" loophole.

I crit with a vorpal weapon and get max damage on the "roll."  I then reroll those dice.  Any of those that deal max damage can be rerolled.  That's it.  If you keep getting maximum results, you keep rerolling.  But getting that forever seems... unlikely.  Clearly I'm misunderstanding the argument on some level.


----------



## Chocobo (Jun 24, 2008)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> So here's my question.
> 
> Let's assume for the moment that hong and Andur are correct - the [W] dice maximised by the critical are considered to have been rolled, and thus trigger the Property line in Vorpal.
> 
> ...



Assuming the critical hit text can be applied to an attack recursively.  That really depends on whether there is a sequence of events in determining damage.  

If for instance you have a sequence such as:
1. Roll damage (If critical, damage roll is maximum possible)
2. Apply triggered effects from damage roll
3. Roll critical bonus damage
4. Apply triggered effects from critical damage roll

Then there is no way you can recursively apply the critical hit text.

On the other hand, You might have a sequence such as:
1. Roll damage (If critical, damage roll is maximum possible)
2. Apply triggered effects from damage roll
3. If additional damage dice are triggered, go to 1
4. Roll critical bonus damage
5. Apply triggered effects from critical damage roll
6. If additional damage dice are triggered, go to 4

As it happens, neither sequence is defined in the rules.  So you're making an unsupported assumption by claiming that it is the second (or similar).  Of course, the other side is making a similarly unsupported assumption by claiming it is the first.


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 24, 2008)

I think Andur had it right when he pointed out the example of a hit and critical hit on PHB 276:

With the attack power given, Valenae deals 2[W] damage, which means 2d8 with her longsword.  She has a +7 bonus to this damage roll; +3 from strength, +2 from a feat bonus, and +2 from an enhancement bonus on her longsword.

The critical hit example in the paragraph below says she's dealing a maximum damage of 23, which is the maximum of 2d8 (16) + her total bonuses (7), so 7+16 = 23

Starting on page 232, any Enhancement Bonus listed under a weapon is added to "Attack rolls and damage rolls."

So if a critical hit was simply damage dealt instead of a maximized damage roll, then the previous example would be false, and the damage would instead be less.

Therefore, unless that specific example has been errata'd (and one never knows with those crazy cats at WotC), I'd say it's fairly clear that the Critical Damage is simply a maximized damage roll.

Now, since the Critical Hit is determined to be a roll, Vorpal WILL come into play with every single weapon die roll that's been maximized.

I'm sure others will see it differently, but when you have ambiguity and then an example presented that leans towards one argument, well...I usually start leanin', but que sera sera.


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 24, 2008)

*if the dice aren't rolling, they aren't getting rolled again*

Thats the way I look at it. I roll natural 20 to hit: I am not rolling any dice for damage, just applying the maximum result. You actually have to roll the dice to get to roll again.

It says: Damage die. And damage die are are very specific thing: the W.
And damage die can be an expression  of multiple dice. So "the maximum on a damage die" for a falchion is 8 on 2 d4: only if you get 8 do you reroll the "damage die" So, falchions are worse: 1 in 16 chance of maximum.

So, As written, extra dice shouldn't be rerollable.

They may, however, have ruled differently.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

RefinedBean said:
			
		

> I think Andur had it right when he pointed out the example of a hit and critical hit on PHB 276:
> 
> With the attack power given, Valenae deals 2[W] damage, which means 2d8 with her longsword.  She has a +7 bonus to this damage roll; +3 from strength, +2 from a feat bonus, and +2 from an enhancement bonus on her longsword.
> 
> ...




That example doesn't actually help his argument any. Nowhere does it suggest that critical hit is actually rolled, just that a critical hit takes into account all the factors in a damage roll.

The bonuses are accounted for when you max the die on a critical hit, that does not imply that you rolled die or a roll was made.

It's actually pretty clear when critical hits specifically say: Rather than roll damage, as in rather than physically rolling die, which is what vorpal checks. If it does what you claim it does it would say something to the effect of: Act as though you rolled maximum damage.

Unless you can find an alternative interpretation of:

"Rather than rolling damage..."

There is just no ground to stand on.


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 24, 2008)

So you're saying that a critical hit takes all damage that can be applied to a maximum roll into account, and yet isn't a maximum roll in itself; it takes that number and makes it a simple "damage applied."

Okay, I see where you're coming from now.

So, (and as far as I know these don't exist), if any monster or character had an ability keyed off of a damage roll from a foe, a Critical Hit wouldn't trigger this?

I'm not trying to be snide, but it seems silly that Vorpal's main awesomeness doesn't trigger on a critical hit.

But, to each their own!


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 24, 2008)

*the main awesomeness*

The fact that it applies to all attacks, whereas many proprties mostly only work on criticals, means you are getting a lot out of vorpal. Having it work on criticals as well might be too much of a good thing.

How about "damage die" given that damage die can be the expression of multiple dice? Should vorpal falchions only get rerolls when they roll their 2d4 and it comes up 8?


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 24, 2008)

hamishspence said:
			
		

> How about "damage die" given that damage die can be the expression of multiple dice? Should vorpal falchions only get rerolls when they roll their 2d4 and it comes up 8?




I'd say so...but I can't really back that up through RAW.

Technically, each d4 is a "weapon damage die," right?  So even if you roll only one "4", you'd reroll it.

This will probably be errata'd after WotC is done posting up their next article, "Zombies:  They Don't Have to be Dead!," or whatever they have lined up.


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 24, 2008)

*damage die*

it said "Damage die" for a falcion was 2 d4, so by strict reading of the term damage die (since it says A damage die can be expressed as multiple dice) you'd have to get both. Unless there is a ruling otherwise.

Vorpal says: You can reroll any damage die that comes up max and add it in.

Are they defining damage die as only weapon damage die (so you can't reroll critical dice, sneak attack, etc)?

Or are they defining damage die as any dice rolled for damage (so all critcial, sneak, hunters quarry, etc, have chance of exploding as well?)

And which thread has the answer?, since its not in errata as far as I can tell.


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 24, 2008)

Heck if I know, buddy.

I thought I saw people talking about re-rolling the d12's that came up through a crit or the Vorpal's daily power, so perhaps you can.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jun 24, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Wrong again Dlichen, you are good at being wrong, hopefully you get paid to do it:




Originally: I asked Andur to leave the thread.

Edited: However, it has been pointed out that Rel has already spoken about this in the thread and that you have been moderating your language since then, so I retract that instruction.

Regards


----------



## DLichen (Jun 24, 2008)

Alright, I did the math: d4s after gaunts of destruct + vorpal average 4.5 damage.

A 7[w] attack on a noncrit deals 7[9] = 63

A 7[w] attack on a crit deals 7[8] + 6d12 = *95*

That's assuming you don't get to reroll those d12s either.

Hopefully, that puts to rest the noncrit beating the crit myth.

As for damage die, according to custserv, a 2d4 attack is rerolled with vorpal whenever one of the die is a 4, so that's the rule I'm using for now.


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 24, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> As for damage die, according to custserv, a 2d4 attack is rerolled with vorpal whenever one of the die is a 4, so that's the rule I'm using for now.




Wow, really?

Awesome stuff.

I'm off to go get me a vorpal scythe...


----------



## Zsig (Jun 25, 2008)

So, let's see if I got this right. Suppose I'm a Fighter/Kensei/Demigod level 26, with the following stats:

Str 26 (+8) 
Weapon Focus (Heavy Blade) (+3),
Kensei Mastery (+4),
Devastating Critical (+1d10 on a crit),
+6 Vorpal Falchion (+6, +6d12 on a crit).

Then I attack with Reaping Strike, which deals 2[W]+strength modifier if you hit.

*Hit:*
Total Damage: 4d4 +8 +3 +4 +6 = 4d4+21 
Then, each and every 4 that comes up when I roll for damage I get to roll again and add to total damage.

*Critical Hit*:
Base damage: 16 (4x4) +8 +3 +4 +6 = 37 
Critical Damage: 6d4 (high crit) +1d10 (devastating crit) +6d12 (vorpal)

Total Damage: 37 +6d4 +1d10 +6d12 and I get to reroll these if they come up 4, 10 and 12 respectively.

Sounds quite straight forward to me, and to me the rules are intended the same way they're written.

Also, I don't understand how someone could say that a critical would be weaker than a regular hit, look at all the dice you're rolling.

Finally, but not least important, magic items in 4E are balanced by their Item Level, so theorethically, a Level 30 Weapon should be as good (or as broken) as any other Level 30 Weapon. Just because Vorpal used to be insta-death on a natural 20 in 3.X, it doesn't mean it has to be this way in 4E.


----------



## Unkabear (Jun 25, 2008)

I really wanted to root for the roll the maxed damage die side myself, but darn Zsig and a very well laid out example.


----------



## Vempyre (Jun 25, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Vempyyre, that is fine, just make sure not to add feat, enhancement, power, unnamed or any other types of bonuses to critical hit damage either, in otherwords you are saying the examples given in the PHB are all wrong when they give out critical damage.
> 
> In this case, "rather than" means, "rather than waste 2 hours of your life rolling until you get maximum damage on the dice..."






			
				Vempyre said:
			
		

> even though we do add bonus dmg to it like feats n such, unlike ongoing dmg or fixed dmg like cleave.






			
				PHB said:
			
		

> .. _determine_ the maximum damage you can roll




So it's not a roll, but you determine (not roll, determine, it's important to make the difference) the max damage you would have done if you had rolled. Not a roll = no rerolling max dice since it's not even a roll (talking about vorpal here) but determining max dmg we could have rolled tells ya to add the bonus dmg due to feats, stats, etc as if you had rolled but only for the purpose of the determination, it's doesn't mean it's a roll as the 1st part of the text clearly states.

There is always a thousand ways to interpret words, even simple and clear words known to all. It's all about culture. Anyway, to me the text is simple and clear and leaves no doubt, especially when you have the background knowledge of how 4E is built and how it's power level curves at this or that lvl. If one would say that the text isnt clear (it is, but for some it isn't), just look at items of similar lvl. Making the vorpal do max+roll+crit dice would make it way beyond other items of it's lvl especially when used with 7[W] or 5[W] powers which are common at that lvl of play.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 25, 2008)

D'oh!
I seem to have forgotten to add 56 damage to the successful scythe crit.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Onwards to page 8!


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

GoodKingJayIII said:
			
		

> I'm not understanding this "infinite damage" loophole.
> 
> I crit with a vorpal weapon and get max damage on the "roll."  I then reroll those dice.  Any of those that deal max damage can be rerolled.  That's it.  If you keep getting maximum results, you keep rerolling.  But getting that forever seems... unlikely.  Clearly I'm misunderstanding the argument on some level.



 It comes in trying to treat English words as terms of art.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 25, 2008)

I think, as far as I can tell, the infinite damage loophole is due to the vorpal effect _not_ being extra damage _caused_ by a critical hit.
Thereby your rerolled 4s will also get maxed, and rerolled, ad infinitum.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Danceofmasks said:
			
		

> I think, as far as I can tell, the infinite damage loophole is due to the vorpal effect _not_ being extra damage _caused_ by a critical hit.
> Thereby your rerolled 4s will also get maxed, and rerolled, ad infinitum.



 Of course, this loophole only matters to people arguing about the rules on a forum, as opposed to applying the rules in play.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Jun 25, 2008)

Or programming a computer game .. when you'll end up with an actual infinite loop, and the program freezes.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

You can play the game however you like, that doesn't change what the rules actually say.


----------



## Andur (Jun 25, 2008)

Ok, so there is a very close thread thread on the Wotc Boards:  http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1040042

Looks like someone over there asked about critical hits in post 76: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1047354&page=3

The answer would support that the dice for the crit have indeed "rolled" their maximum value.

awaiting Hong's "to page nine" post...


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Onwards to page 9!


----------



## erik_the_guy (Jun 25, 2008)

HOLY SHARK!!
So no one answered for hours, then I come on the next day to find 5.45*10^12 responses.

The general consensus seems to be that the the damage dice that are automatically maximized by the critical hit do indeed count for a re-roll. It seems as though one has great incentive to use a high crit weapon for this purpose.

EDIT: Oh wait, no it isn't.

Thanks for the responses and the link to the WotC forum.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Um, no, that's the exact opposite.

The general consensus is that it is not, both in this thread and wotc.


----------



## erik_the_guy (Jun 25, 2008)

hamishspence said:
			
		

> it said "Damage die" for a falcion was 2 d4, so by strict reading of the term damage die (since it says A damage die can be expressed as multiple dice) you'd have to get both. Unless there is a ruling otherwise.
> 
> Vorpal says: You can reroll any damage die that comes up max and add it in.
> 
> ...




Since the rules say to re-roll "any" damage die, I think they mean any one die, not each set of 1[W] that turns up maximized. It seems to follow that this would include sneak attack, quarry, curse, and the bonus d12s you gain from a vorpal weapon when you score a critical. Also the bonus d12s from the daily power.


----------



## erik_the_guy (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Um, no, that's the exact opposite.
> 
> The general consensus is that it is not, both in this thread and wotc.




Oh, poop.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

As far as I can tell, the two primary pros for rolling weapon damage again:

1. Maximized or not, you did a damage roll - True, but just because you did a damage roll does not mean you actually rolled the dice since the critical rules state that you just count up the max damage from the roll without actually rolling the dice, which is what triggers vorpal. If you wish to challenge this point, please explain the "Rather than roll the dice" passage.

2. But vorpal crits now do less damage than regular vorpal hits! - False, look at the math, the extra 6d12 which probably get rerolled more than makes up for it.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Um, no, that's the exact opposite.
> 
> The general consensus is that it is not, both in this thread and wotc.



 I am rather surprised that it is possible to interpret



> 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




As crits not being considered rolls.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Crits use the damage roll rules because otherwise things would break.

That doesn't mean crits trigger vorpal. I again refer to the "Rather than roll the dice" passage.

Vorpal doesn't trigger off a maxed damage roll, but the actual 4 on a d4. This is also why when you roll 2d4, you roll again when you get a 4 on one dice, not only when you get an 8.


----------



## erik_the_guy (Jun 25, 2008)

Okay, so you don't get to re-roll the dice maximized by a crit. You do get an additional 6d12 from the weapon for landing a crit however, and if I am correct you re-roll these if they are maximum. Also, for a high crit weapon, you get to re-roll those dice if they are max, correct?

Thank for those who posted multiple times to make sure that the information drowned out the misinformation!


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Crits use the damage roll rules because otherwise things would break.
> 
> That doesn't mean crits trigger vorpal. I again refer to the "Rather than roll the dice" passage.




You seem to be implying that the physical act of rolling the dice is actually needed to get a max damage result.



> Vorpal doesn't trigger off a maxed damage roll, but the actual 4 on a d4.




A 4 on a d4 is a maxed damage roll.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

A damage roll is defined to be some multiple of your damage die + bonuses

There is a difference between colloquial definitons and rules definitions. Feat, stat, racial bonuses aren't rolled, but they're still part of the rules definiton of damage roll.



			
				hong said:
			
		

> You seem to be implying that the physical act of rolling the dice is actually needed to get a max damage result.




That is exactly what I'm implying since that's is what vorpal states. Vorpal clearly says "Whenever you roll the maximum result on any damage die for this weapon, roll that die again and add the additional result to the damage total. If a reroll results in another maximum damage result, roll it again and keep adding."

It doesn't say when you roll maximum damage. It says when you roll the maximum result on a damage die. You skip rolling damage die when you calculate crit damage, ergo, you don't apply extra [w] damage.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> A damage roll is defined to be some multiple of your damage die + bonuses
> 
> There is a difference between colloquial definitons and rules definitions.




There is no difference, unless one wants to make a difference.



> Feat, stat, racial bonuses aren't rolled, but they're still part of the rules definiton of damage roll.




And this is because feat, stat and racial bonuses aren't random.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> And this is because feat, stat and racial bonuses aren't random.




Oh? What about sneak attack, hunter's quarry, and the like?

They are part of the damage roll. Just because they're random doesn't imply anything.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> That is exactly what I'm implying




I want to watch your game. It must be a hoot, rolling dice and then ignoring the results.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Oh? What about sneak attack, hunter's quarry, and the like?
> 
> They are part of the damage roll. Just because they're random doesn't imply anything.




Nobody said they had to imply anything. Context, my dear Watson.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

It clearly says DON'T ROLL THE DICE.

Rather than making irrelevant comments, why don't you actually address this point?


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Onwards to page 10!


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> It clearly says DON'T ROLL THE DICE.




Exactly. You don't roll the dice, you treat them as if you had rolled maximum.



> Rather than making irrelevant comments, why don't you actually address this point?




I am.


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 25, 2008)

I suppose Exception-Based Design could account for critical hits being the only form of weapon die damage that's not considered a roll, but I'm still not buying it.  Errata, or at least an explanation, will show us the light at some point.

Personally, I think it's more fun to consider the crit hit damage a roll, because why not?  Level 30 weapon, might as well assume you're going to be doing as nasty amount of damage as possible.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Exactly. You don't roll the dice, you treat them as if you had rolled maximum.




The problem is, it doesn't say that. It says determine the highest damage you can roll and use that amount.

It doesn't say determine the highest damage you can roll and use that die roll.

Counting out numbers is not the same as rolling dice. You have already gotten this far, keep up the good work.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

RefinedBean said:
			
		

> I suppose Exception-Based Design could account for critical hits being the only form of weapon die damage that's not considered a roll, but I'm still not buying it.  Errata, or at least an explanation, will show us the light at some point.
> 
> Personally, I think it's more fun to consider the crit hit damage a roll, because why not?  Level 30 weapon, might as well assume you're going to be doing as nasty amount of damage as possible.




It actually does: 

Extra Damage: Magic weapons and implements, as
well as high crit weapons, can increase the damage
you deal when you score a critical hit. If this extra
damage is a die roll, it’s not automatically maximum
damage; you add the result of the roll.

Exception based design is why the xd12s aren't max.

As for why not, yeah, there's no real reason not to house rule it if you want. I'm just arguing what the RAW actually states, I have no opinion on what should happen. It just irks me that people assume that what they want to happen is what the rules says happens.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Counting out numbers is not the same as rolling dice.




Exactly, but it is treated as if you had rolled the dice. The principle is clear, from context.



> You have already gotten this far, keep up the good work.




That's what I said!


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Exactly, but it is treated as if you had rolled the dice. The principle is clear, from context.




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

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


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> It actually does:
> 
> Extra Damage: Magic weapons and implements, as
> well as high crit weapons, can increase the damage
> ...




Well, I meant the weapon die itself, but I see your point.

I believe I have a long way to go before any of my characters are getting a vorpal ANYTHING, so I'm not sweating it.


----------



## Lurker37 (Jun 25, 2008)

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.
> 
> ...




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 (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




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 (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 25, 2008)

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 (Jun 25, 2008)

Whew. Onwards to page 11!



			
				DLichen said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 25, 2008)

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 (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 25, 2008)

Zsig said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> "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.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> 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 never 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".




That's why you don't roll the dice, you just treat it as if you had rolled max.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> That's why you don't roll the dice, you just treat it as if you had rolled max.




But you don't.   If you aren't actually rolling dice, you aren't actually rolling max.  and you aren't actually triggering Vorpal.  

I'm not trying to be snarky Hong.  I just don't see any common sense logic to your position. 

Sorry.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> But you don't.



 Of course you do.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Of course you do.




Why "of course"?


----------



## Victoly (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Right. You obtained the damage from the damage die, and thus you rolled it, using the plain-English vernacular meaning of "roll the die" to mean "get a reading from a random number generator which happens to look like a polyhedral thingy".



No, the "plain-English vernacular" meaning of 'roll the die' means to physically pick up a die and toss it at a surface, expecting it to roll and bounce a bit before resting on one of its sides.

I'm sorry, but when people say the _exact opposite_ of what's true, I have to say _something_.

The Vorpal reading seems pretty straightforward to me.  A crit would max the damage from the attack and would not grant any immediate extra rolls from "max die results", but all of the extra dice you normally get to roll because you crit (from the vorpal weapon and from high crit, for example) have a chance to roll maximum and thus a chance to grant further extra dice.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Victoly said:
			
		

> No, the "plain-English vernacular" meaning of 'roll the die' means to physically pick up a die and toss it at a surface, expecting it to roll and bounce a bit before resting on one of its sides.




... and by extension, read a number from it, which is what I was saying, yes?



> The Vorpal reading seems pretty straightforward to me.  A crit would max the damage from the attack and would not grant any immediate extra rolls from "max die results", but all of the extra dice you normally get to roll because you crit (from the vorpal weapon and from high crit, for example) have a chance to roll maximum and thus a chance to grant further extra dice.




Sure it would, because you treat a crit just like any other die roll. You just get max damage automatically.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> ... and by extension, read a number from it, which is what I was saying, yes?




I think the point we are making is that we don't agree with your "by extension".  For those of us who disagree with you, it does not follow. 





> Sure it would, because you treat a crit just like any other die roll. You just get max damage automatically.




You don't treat a crit like any other die roll, because you aren't rolling dice.   If you get to roll extra dice on a crit, you treat *those* like any other die roll. 

I respect your opinion Hong, and I don't think you are trolling.  I think you honestly believe what you are saying, but I just don't agree with your basic premise  (that you can trigger effects based on die rolls without actually rolling dice).


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> I think the point we is that we don't agree with your "by extension".  For those of us who disagree with you, it does not follow.




Ah. I was not aware of all those people who roll dice just to while away the hours. I was thinking that people would generally roll dice because they want to, you know, read what the dice say.



> You don't treat a crit like any other die roll, because you aren't rolling dice.   If you get to roll extra dice on a crit, you treat *those* like any other die roll.




Sure you treat a crit like any other damage roll. That's why all the other rules for damage still apply to crits.



> I respect your opinion Hong, and I don't think you are trolling.  I think you honestly believe what you are saying, but I just don't agree with your basic premise  (that your can trigger effects based on die rolls without actually rolling dice).




It's entirely consistent with treating crits like any other damage roll, just with max damage automatically applied.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Ah. I was not aware of all those people who roll dice just to while away the hours. I was thinking that people would generally roll dice because they want to, you know, read what the dice say.




Cute Hong.




> Sure you treat a crit like any other damage roll. That's why all the other rules for damage still apply to crits.




No, you don't treat it like any other damage roll.  You aren't rolling dice.  That's kind of the point of a crit in 4e - you aren't rolling for damage, you just get the max damage value.  No dice, no rolling, no random number generation.  (Unless something gives you extra dice on a crit, and then those dice are treated like any other die roll.)




> It's entirely consistent with treating crits like any other damage roll, just with max damage automatically applied.




And that's where those of us who disagree with you differ.  Crits are not like any other damage roll.  No dice, no rolling, no random number generation, no reading numbers off the dice.    I don't look at my damage dice at all when I crit.  (With the usual caveat of gaining extra dice on a crit.)


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Cute Hong.




Yes, I am.



> No, you don't treat it like any other damage roll.  You aren't rolling dice.  That's kind of the point of a crit in 4e - you aren't rolling for damage, you just get the max damage value.  No dice, no rolling, no random number generation.  (Unless something gives you extra dice on a crit, and then those dice are treated like any other dice roll.)




Of course you don't physically roll the dice. That doesn't mean it's not like any other damage roll. That's why all the other rules for damage still apply to crits.



> And that's were those of us who disagree with you differ.  Crits are not like any other damage roll.  No dice, no rolling, no random number generation, no reading numbers off the dice.    I don't look at my damage dice at all when I crit.




To be precise, you get max on the dice automatically. In all other respects, it's just like any other damage roll.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Of course you don't physically roll the dice. That doesn't mean it's not like any other damage roll. That's why all the other rules for damage still apply to crits.




That's exactly what it means.  It's not like any other damage roll.  It's different from every other damage roll in the game.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> That's exactly what it means.  It's not like any other damage roll.  It's different from every other damage roll in the game.




It's different in that you get max damage automatically. In all other respects, it's like any other damage roll.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> It's different in that you get max damage automatically. In all other respects, it's like any other damage roll.




Why is it like any other damage roll?


----------



## Victoly (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> ... and by extension, read a number from it, which is what I was saying, yes?



Not really.  You were using the not-common-English gamer-vernacular version of "roll" which means: determine a number from a possible array with varying degrees of statistical likelihood (or something to that effect).  I'll grant that "getting a reading" is implied by "roll the dice", but by no means is that result necessarily numerical.  Some games use non-numerical dice, and in the common vernacular we still call that "rolling the dice."  Furthermore, if I were to tell you to pick a number between three and twelve, we wouldn't say that you "rolled" it (unless we'd all been playing too much WoW - in which case a strong case could be made for the argument that none of us would be speaking the common vernacular anymore.)

In plain English, "rolling dice" necessarily implies physically picking them up and tossing them, which you do not do when you score a critical hit.  Sometimes we use the phrase "rolling the dice" as a metaphor for "taking a chance", but since this is a metaphor it is an exception and wouldn't rightly be thought of as the "common vernacular" meaning of the term - furthermore, that metaphor doesn't necessarily have anything to do with numbers.   

/end grammar discussion.

(Really, the "common vernacular" meaning of the term is irrelevant, since within D&D's own definition of the term a "roll" does not take place with a critical hit - see below.)



			
				hong said:
			
		

> Sure it would, because you treat a crit just like any other die roll. You just get max damage automatically.



Well, no you don't treat a crit like any other die roll, because it isn't one; _you don't roll the dice for a crit_.  You just mathematically work out what the maximum result of a roll _would_ be, and then you _don't roll the dice_.

Quoting the PHB, emphasis added:
"*Rather than roll damage*, determine the maximum result you _can_ roll with your attack. This is your critical damage."

Please carefully note that saying you "can" roll damage with an attack does not mean that any roll actually took place for a critical hit.  The critical hit rules explicitly state that you *do not roll damage*.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Why is it like any other damage roll?



 Because all the other rules for damage still apply.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Because all the other rules for damage still apply.




You keep saying this.  I don't think it means what you think it means.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Victoly said:
			
		

> Not really.  You were using the not-common-English gamer-vernacular version of "roll" which means: determine a number from a possible array with varying degrees of statistical likelihood (or something to that effect).  I'll grant that "getting a reading" is implied by "roll the dice", but by no means is that result necessarily numerical.  Some games use non-numerical dice, and in the common vernacular we still call that "rolling the dice."  Furthermore, if I were to tell you to pick a number between three and twelve, we wouldn't say that you "rolled" it (unless we'd all been playing too much WoW - in which case a strong case could be made for the argument that none of us would be speaking the common vernacular anymore.)




WoW is common vernacular. Trust me.



> In plain English, "rolling dice" necessarily implies physically picking them up and tossing them, which you do not do when you score a critical hit.  Sometimes we use the phrase "rolling the dice" as a metaphor for "taking a chance", but since this is a metaphor it is an exception and wouldn't rightly be thought of as the "common vernacular" meaning of the term - furthermore, that metaphor doesn't necessarily have anything to do with numbers.
> 
> /end grammar discussion.




In the common vernacular, rolling the dice means reading a number off the random number generator. Sometimes, that random number generator can be dispensed with, but that doesn't mean the intended meaning of rolling the dice suddenly becomes unclear.



> Well, no you don't treat a crit like any other die roll, because it isn't one; _you don't roll the dice for a crit_.  You just mathematically work out what the maximum result of a roll _would_ be, and then you _don't roll the dice_.




Of course you don't physically roll the dice



> Quoting the PHB, emphasis added:
> "*Rather than roll damage*, determine the maximum result you _can_ roll with your attack. This is your critical damage."
> 
> Please carefully note that saying you "can" roll damage with an attack does not mean that any roll actually took place for a critical hit.  The critical hit rules explicitly state that you *do not roll damage*.




The critical hit rules state that instead of rolling damage, you get max. This basically means that you do not have to waste time physically rolling the dice, and then ignoring the result. This is still a damage roll, in the everyday sense of the term.


----------



## hippu (Jun 25, 2008)

i have to go with hong here. according to custserv:



> all dice rolls are considered to be the maximum possible roll



which imo clearly states you act as if you had actually thrown the dice and gotten max result...

(yay my first post)


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> You keep saying this.  I don't think it means what you think it means.



 Of course it means what I think it means.

Onward to page 12!


----------



## Victoly (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> WoW is common vernacular. Trust me.



I'll trust you the day I hear the guy with the hotdog cart at the corner of my street yelling "WTS sausages" and listing his prices in gold, silver, and copper coins.



			
				hong said:
			
		

> In the common vernacular, rolling the dice means reading a number off the random number generator.



No.
It.
Does.
NOT!




			
				hong said:
			
		

> The critical hit rules state that instead of rolling damage, you get max. This basically means that you do not have to waste time physically rolling the dice, and then ignoring the result. This is still a damage roll, in the everyday sense of the term.



No, it is _not_ still a damage roll in _any_ sense of the word.  The D&D rules themselves state that it isn't a roll.  You can't claim "well, they mean 'roll' _this_ way in the crit rules and _that_ way in the vorpal weapon rules" without damned good justification for it, which you have not yet provided.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Of course it means what I think it means.
> 
> Onward to page 12!





"It's just like every other die roll, except that you don't roll dice."

That seems to be the crux of your arguement, right?




> In the common vernacular, rolling the dice means reading a number off the random number generator.




No, it really doesn't mean that.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Victoly said:
			
		

> I'll trust you the day I hear the guy with the hotdog cart at the corner of my street yelling "WTS sausages" and listing his prices in gold, silver, and copper coins.




We are, of course, talking about the common vernacular among a rather uncommon subset of the general populace. I thought this was clear. Perhaps I was wrong.



> No, it is _not_ still a damage roll in _any_ sense of the word.  The D&D rules themselves state that it isn't a roll.  You can't claim "well, they mean 'roll' _this_ way in the crit rules and _that_ way in the vorpal weapon rules" without damned good justification for it, which you have not yet provided.




They all boil down to the same thing -- a crit is a damage roll, maximised -- so there is no this way and that.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> "It's just like every other die roll, except that you don't roll dice."
> 
> That seems to be the crux of your arguement, right?



 It's just like every other damage roll, except you don't roll dice.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> It's just like every other damage roll, except you don't roll dice.




It doesn't trigger any effect that requires dice to be rolled, because no dice were rolled.  The vorpal ability triggers off of rolling max damage on the dice.  There is no getting around that Hong.  Sorry.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> It doesn't trigger any effect that requires dice to be rolled, because no dice were rolled.  The vorpal ability triggers off of rolling max damage on the dice.  There is no getting around that Hong.  Sorry.



 Sure there is, because a crit is just like every other damage roll. You just don't physically need to roll dice to get max damage.


----------



## Victoly (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> We are, of course, talking about the common vernacular among a rather uncommon subset of the general populace. I thought this was clear. Perhaps I was wrong.



Your words were "plain-English vernacular," not "gaming vernacular." There's quite a difference there.  But, again, this is irrelevant, since the PHB specifically states that a crit is not a roll. 



			
				hong said:
			
		

> They all boil down to the same thing -- a crit is a damage roll, maximised -- so there is no this way and that.



No.  You are flat-out incorrect. A crit is not a damage roll. The PHB specifically states that it is not a damage roll. A crit is not a damage roll any more than my damage from cleave is a damage roll.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> It doesn't trigger any effect that requires dice to be rolled, because no dice were rolled.



Then you don't get any bonuses to the damage from Enhancement, Item, Feat, or any other sources. It's just the weapon dice.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Sure there is, because a crit is just like every other damage roll. You just don't physically need to roll dice to get max damage.




But you do need to physically roll dice to trigger the vorpal ability.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

Zurai said:
			
		

> Then you don't get any bonuses to the damage from Enhancement, Item, Feat, or any other sources. It's just the weapon dice.




Those are bonuses to damage, not an effect that is triggered by rolling dice.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Victoly said:
			
		

> Your words were "plain-English vernacular," not "gaming vernacular." There's quite a difference there.  But, again, this is irrelevant, since the PHB specifically states that a crit is not a roll.




The PHB specifically states that rather than rolling the dice, you get max damage. Which is equivalent to saying that a crit is a normal damage roll, but with max damage.



> No.  You are flat-out incorrect. A crit is not a damage roll. The PHB specifically states that it is not a damage roll. A crit is not a damage roll any more than my damage from cleave is a damage roll.




...

Onward to page 13!


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> But you do need to physically roll dice to trigger the vorpal ability.



 No, you just need to get max damage.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> Those are bonuses to damage, not an effect that is triggered by rolling dice.



Incorrect. The PHB is very clear that they only come into play when you "roll damage".

Yes, that means the PHB contradicts itself when it says you don't roll damage for crits, but all the examples include adding enhancement bonuses.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> The PHB specifically states that rather than rolling the dice, you get max damage. Which is equivalent to saying that a crit is a normal damage roll, but with max damage.




No, it's not equivalent Hong.   

You can keep repeating it, but that doesn't make it true.

A crit gives you max damage instead of the normal damage roll.  It is not equivalent to a normal damage roll.   It's not normal in any way.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

Zurai said:
			
		

> Incorrect. The PHB is very clear that they only come into play when you "roll damage".
> 
> Yes, that means the PHB contradicts itself when it says you don't roll damage for crits, but all the examples include adding enhancement bonuses.




I am so not interested in discussing this.  Really.


----------



## Timmer (Jun 25, 2008)

*waves*

If I may interject. I actually find this conversation enlightening and hope none of the participants are taking the other side personally!

What I wanted to say is that I think both sides are arguing from the wrong angle. If I may...

I am reminded of my favorite card game (The Spoils, RIP) with beautiful rules. There was lots of discussions about rules on cards being played. It took a while to get ones head wrapped around them but it went something like this:
You can play a card but the card at that point has not been played.
Once you play a card, triggers occur, etc. If the card is still valid/alive at that point it can be put into play.
Once a card is put into play in this manor it has been played.
Not all cards will enter play and will have been played; for example, another card rule may put a card into play. It is in play but has not been played.
Further, a player may play a card but something will occur that keeps it from being put into play and therefore from being played.

Sorry for my ramble. The reason I bring that up is that it sounds obtuse at first but once you realize *play*, *been played*, and *entered play* were keywords with their various triggers, this made cards and their effects easier to understand (stuff like "When a card enters play, do X" or "When a card has been played", etc).

Now back to this discussion....

I feel that people are arguing too high level. The real question is:
1. Is *damage roll* a keyword rule or is it more a vague expression like "I rolled a fighter character last night" (you may have not rolled a single die!)
... if you think it is a keyword rule, then ...
2. does it refer to the act of rolling die or the act of computing damage

Once those questions are answered, the rest follows. And, now, back to the show!


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> No, it's not equivalent Hong.
> 
> You can keep repeating it, but that doesn't make it true.
> 
> A crit gives you max damage instead of the normal damage roll.  It is not equivalent to a normal damage roll.   It's not normal in any way.



 It has to be equivalent to a normal damage roll, because there are no special rules for adding all the other bits that Zurai mentioned to a crit. Unless, that is, you are willing to countenance the possibility that those other bits in fact don't apply to a crit.


----------



## Victoly (Jun 25, 2008)

So, Hong, why do you think the PHB uses "roll" to mean one thing in the section on critical hits (physically rolling the dice - "Rather than roll damage...") and a completely different thing in the section describing vorpal weapons (attaining a particular numerical result for your damage)?


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> It has to be equivalent to a normal damage roll.




No it doesn't.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Victoly said:
			
		

> So, Hong, why do you think the PHB uses "roll" to mean one thing in the section on critical hits (physically rolling the dice - "Rather than roll damage...") and a completely different thing in the section describing vorpal weapons (attaining a particular numerical result for your damage)?



 Because English doesn't have to conform to the rigorous standards of legalese.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> No it doesn't.



 Yes it does.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Yes it does.





And that's the debate in a nutshell.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Onward to page 14!


----------



## Victoly (Jun 25, 2008)

I also think that there was an attempt to better balance the magic items this time around.  A crit from a vorpal weapon _already_ gets +6d12 damage - this combined with its daily power and special property regarding damage dice puts it on par with other level 30 weapons without an extra free 2-5d10 or d12 damage.  Sure, the vorpal weapon was stupidly powerful before, but that was, well, stupid.  Just because the weapon has a history of having instant-kill crits in previous editions doesn't mean the trend has to continue in 4E.


----------



## Victoly (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Because English doesn't have to conform to the rigorous standards of legalese.



You're talking about a rulebook... "rules" and "laws" are intrinsically similar concepts.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

As entertaining as it has been,  it's pretty clear that no progress towards common ground has been made. 

I wish I could say I understood your point of view Hong, but it still doesn't make any sense to me.  

"A crit is exactly every other damage roll except you don't roll for damage, but you still trigger any effect that requires damage dice to be rolled." 

I simply can't derive that statement from the rules in the PHB.

Have fun.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Victoly said:
			
		

> You're talking about a rulebook... "rules" and "laws" are intrinsically similar concepts.



 Nah. If you look at any RPG book out there, they all read very differently to the 3E core books. 3E was the game that took the legalist perspective to new heights.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Nah. If you look at any RPG book out there, they all read very differently to the 3E core books. 3E was the game that took the legalist perspective to new heights.




This is not 3e


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

And he's not interested in defending himself beyond because "I say so"

Let it go.


----------



## Karui_Kage (Jun 25, 2008)

I have to say I disagree with Hong's ruling on a 'damage roll' and 'rolling damage' being one and the same.

To me:
Damage Roll = Total damage done, despite any actual rolling
Rolling Damage = Physically rolling for damage.

A minion's damage could be considered a 'damage roll', for example, but no one actually 'rolls damage'. Similarly, a critical hit damage can be considered a 'damage roll', but no one 'rolls damage'.

I admit it's somewhat bad English, and we can debate the meaning of 'damage roll' to the end of time and back. But when someone says 'X happens when you roll damage' and a critical hit says 'instead of rolling damage', it seems pretty obvious that this does not happen on a crit.

This is just RAW, as I see it. Not RAI or RAU or whatever. With Wizards and DnD, especially with their new 'keyword' system, it seems a lot of things need to be taken literally, unless they make little sense. As others have shown statistically in this thread, a vorpal weapon still does plenty of damage even if you don't reroll [W]s on a crit, so it seems like this is RAI as well.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> And he's not interested in defending himself beyond because "I say so"
> 
> Let it go.



I don't notice you responding to the point I made in hong's defence. The rules _very clearly_ contradict themselves on how to handle damage on critical hits. The only sane way to resolve the contradiction is to take the approach that critical hits are treated in every way as a damage roll, except that you assume you rolled maximum damage.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> This is not 3e



 Er, yes. That's why "roll the dice" can be interpreted in its vague English meaning, as opposed to a tightly defined term of art.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

Karui_Kage said:
			
		

> I have to say I disagree with Hong's ruling on a 'damage roll' and 'rolling damage' being one and the same.
> 
> To me:
> Damage Roll = Total damage done, despite any actual rolling



If you take this interpretation, then you also add weapon enhancement bonus, feat bonuses, and untyped bonuses to the extra damage you do from a Cleave or from a miss on Reaping Strike.


----------



## Karui_Kage (Jun 25, 2008)

Huh? Cleave says "and an enemy adjacent to you takes damage equal to your Strength modifier".

Where in there does it say 'damage roll'? Heck, that's a plain as you can get it. "equal" to your "strength modifier". You can't really argue 'equal'.

I probably should have clarified my meaning as:
Damage Roll: Total damage done when dice could be rolled

Or something. To be honest, I really don't know. We've never questioned when it said 'damage roll' before in our group, we just added whatever to the damage unless the power said otherwise (in the case above, it's pretty clear the extra damage is 'equal' to the 'strength modiifer').

In the case of Vorpal, it says 'when you roll damage', which also seems pretty clear.

I guess you can argue vernacular to the heavens and back, but it just makes sense this way.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Zurai said:
			
		

> I don't notice you responding to the point I made in hong's defence. The rules _very clearly_ contradict themselves on how to handle damage on critical hits. The only sane way to resolve the contradiction is to take the approach that critical hits are treated in every way as a damage roll, except that you assume you rolled maximum damage.




I'm sorry, I don't see a contradiction in those rules. I'm not sure where in the topic you actually made your point since I haven't read the last couple pages but I'll go over the RAW. But since you provided a counterpoint I can actually argue against, it might be worthwhile to go over it and explore the differences.



			
				PHB said:
			
		

> Maximum Damage: *Rather than roll damage,
> determine the maximum damage you can roll with
> your attack*. This is your critical damage.
> 
> ...




Ok, so rather than roll damage, you determine the max damage you can roll with your *attack*. Attack damage is determined by a damage roll as previously noted 276. Which is weapon die + bonuses. You determine what your maximum damage roll without rolling die. This is pretty clear. Attack damage is almost never weapon die alone, since most attacks have +ability score.

This doesn't change the fact that you actually HAVEN'T rolled weapon die which triggers vorpal.

The contradiction only arises if you assume attack damage is purely weapon damage, a conclusion which has no backing by RAW.


----------



## Karui_Kage (Jun 25, 2008)

Looking further into it, I'm not sure why the definition 'damage roll' was brought into this, other then to confuse the issue. The definition of the Vorpal weapon seems clear.

"Whenever you roll the maximum result on any damage die for this weapon, roll that die again..."

If they meant for you to reroll the weapon dice on crits, why not say
"Whenever you receive the maximum result on any damage roll for this weapon, roll the weapon damage die again..."?

Despite what some people think about how rules definitions and lawyering is the purview of 3.5, 4.0 seems to have quite the share. That this weapon clearly spells out the action of rolling seems to mean it intended the effect not to have you re-roll crit dice.

Then again, maybe it does. The beauty of this is, I or the posters of this thread may never know. It's wizards. One CS representative may say one thing, another may say the opposite. Are there really that may level 30 games being run right now that it's that large of a problem?


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

The RAW clearly says "You do not roll damage". It also says only to add the modifiers if you roll damage. If you take the interpretation that you're not rolling damage, such as is required to rule that Vorpal weapons don't explode on critical damage, then you're not rolling damage and cannot add enhancement bonuses or anything other than ability modifiers. If you take the interpretation that you're rolling the damage but it's automatically maximized, then the intent of the rules works but the letter of the rules is bent or bypassed.

You can't add enhancement bonuses unless you roll damage. On criticals, you do not roll damage. You determine damage as if you had rolled maximum. Vorpal weapons give you an extra damage dice whenever you roll damage. 1 + 1 = 2.


----------



## Karui_Kage (Jun 25, 2008)

It says you add enhancement bonuses on 'damage rolls', not on 'rolling damage'. One seems to be a definition of something you can get, the other one seems to specify an action you physically take.

The distinction seems, to me at least, to be important. I could easily see arguing the other side as well. I don't know, it just seems to feel right this way.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

The definition of damage roll arises because as implied by the box in 276, bonuses only apply to damage rolls and not damage in general. That's mostly poor positioning than actual writing, but it's there. The argument is that if you don't make a damage roll, you can never apply bonuses.

This is because the gamey definition of a damage roll is only a name. When you crit, you determine what damage you can do without actually rolling, this does not imply that crits are not damage rolls, merely that crits don't roll die. If you're going to apply the gamey definition of damage roll, you have to separate it from the normal definition. As unintuitive as it is, you can have a damage roll without rolling because you're using the game definition of damage roll which is weapon dice + bonuses.

The maximum damage you can roll with an attack is its damage roll, the damage roll definition does not imply that you copy the state of the dice when you calculate max damage.

If you're going to argue in legalese, it's bad form to assume anything in the real world.


----------



## Karui_Kage (Jun 25, 2008)

Just to be clear, DLichen, you know I'm on your side, yes?


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Sorry Karui, I was typing it up before you responded.


----------



## Karui_Kage (Jun 25, 2008)

No worries then


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 25, 2008)

Karui_Kage said:
			
		

> "Whenever you roll the maximum result on any damage die for this weapon, roll that die again..."
> 
> If they meant for you to reroll the weapon dice on crits, why not say
> "Whenever you receive the maximum result on any damage roll for this weapon, roll the weapon damage die again..."?




That's a very different statement.

Let's say your damage roll is 2d8.

You could achieve the maximum result on any damage die with any of the combinations (1,8), (2,8), (3,8), (4,8), (5,8), (6,8), (7,8), (8,8), (8,7), (8,6), (8,5), (8,4), (8,3), (8,2), (8,1).  You can only achieve the maximum result on the damage roll with the combination (8,8).

I'm going to rephrase my question from several pages back.

Let's say I make an attack with my Vorpal Weapon and do not roll a critical.  What is the maximum damage I can roll with the attack?

-Hyp.


----------



## hong (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> The definition of damage roll arises because as implied by the box in 276, bonuses only apply to damage rolls and not damage in general. That's mostly poor positioning than actual writing, but it's there. The argument is that if you don't make a damage roll, you can never apply bonuses.
> 
> This is because the gamey definition of a damage roll is only a name. When you crit, you determine what damage you can do without actually rolling, this does not imply that crits are not damage rolls, merely that crits don't roll die. If you're going to apply the gamey definition of damage roll, you have to separate it from the normal definition. As unintuitive as it is, you can have a damage roll without rolling because you're using the game definition of damage roll which is weapon dice + bonuses.




Sure you can. A crit is a damage roll that's maxed.

See?


----------



## fedelas (Jun 25, 2008)

So 14 pages of of debate based on "yes is a roll" and "no it isn't" and not much other argument and no one has a real answer? Sorry I'm unable to ask CutServ but if somebody can i really appreciate to had a more "official" answer posted here.
Thanks to all folks.


----------



## Andur (Jun 25, 2008)

To me Cust Service was very clear on the fact that a critical hit is like all other damage rolls with all dice to be considered rolled with the maximum result.

Roll the dice, can mean many things, including the two most common of rolling physical dice, it can also mean to try one's luck.  (For those it means a very specific thing, it doesn't)

Without dice you cannot achieve a maximum damage roll, result, whatever.  In order to achieve it all results of all die have to be maximized.  In pseudo code you get:
Die=RNG(1,10)
Crit=Die=10
Anytime the Die range changes so does the crit value, the crit value is dependent on the die.



> 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.




Keyword in the quote is considered which means "regarded as", regard means "to relate or refer to", relate means "to establish or demonstrate a connection between".

Until the "cons" guys can refute the CServ guy, I'll go with the "malleable" ruling of CServ.  (It's the only one we have, but we've all seen CServ contradict itself several times, much like the Sage does.)


----------



## DClown (Jun 25, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> To me Cust Service was very clear on the fact that a critical hit is like all other damage rolls with all dice to be considered rolled with the maximum result.
> 
> Roll the dice, can mean many things, including the two most common of rolling physical dice, it can also mean to try one's luck.  (For those it means a very specific thing, it doesn't)
> 
> ...




When you ask CServ a question they start from a very basic precept that everyone calling them is an idiot.  They have to answer in a way that will allow the person asking the question to understand what they need to do in that specific situation.  They do not for example have a game term dictionary, or an english dictionary on their table and look up every single word to see how it might impact the rest of the game.  

This for example is NOT one of the thoughts in their head.

"Hmm this person is asking how to determine critical damage in a generic sense, and I used the word 'considered' here, which means to regard, but they might confuse that with the 'roll' definition and end up rolling extra dice on the vorpal crit so I should use the word 'replace' instead."


They say what they need to say in order to answer the specific scenario.  Unless you asked the very specific question with regard to vorpal crits, taking a CS response to a generic crit question and trying to apply english definitions to their response to come up with 'extra rules' is not a valid justification.  I'm not saying your wrong, just that your reasoning here is flawed.  So has anybody asked this specific question of CS?


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

If I have time today I'll try sending a question to customer service. 

If all it is a matter of rolling a 2-7 extra dice on a crit (depending on attack power used),  I really don't think it's a big deal either way, not at lvl 27-30 (when you can reasonable expect to have a vorpal weapon). 

I just don't agree with the "infinite damage" on a crit interpetation.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jun 25, 2008)

WOW. 14 pages of debate over something that used to be solved with-you cut off your foe's head: he dies. So the 4E methods are simpler?


----------



## Andur (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> If I have time today I'll try sending a question to customer service.
> 
> If all it is a matter of rolling a 2-7 extra dice on a crit (depending on attack power used),  I really don't think it's a big deal either way, not at lvl 27-30 (when you can reasonable expect to have a vorpal weapon).
> 
> I just don't agree with the "infinite damage" on a crit interpetation.




On average rerolling the initial "maximized damage" will cause a increase of 50-60% damage over a regular crit.

And the infinite damage is not possible without some major abuse.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> I just don't agree with the "infinite damage" on a crit interpetation.



What infinite damage interpretation? No one's proposing that vorpal criticals do infinite damage.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> On average rerolling the initial "maximized damage" will cause a increase of 50-60% damage over a regular crit.
> 
> And the infinite damage is not possible without some major abuse.




50% increase which just isn't necessary since the crit does 30 something damage more than a noncrit anyway.

I have no idea what you're pushing for when you're still ignoring the rules as written. There is no reason to reroll the weapon dice at all except for personal preference. Houserule it then.


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 25, 2008)

Well, if the custserv person said that the dice are "considered to be at the maximum possible roll," then that's good enough evidence for me that the critical damage that's being added up is really just a roll of max damage with all other bonuses applied.

Are there any other cases in 4E of damage simply being added up and then applied?  Crits may be an exception, but it would help support that side.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

As previously stated, Custserv doesn't answer in lawyer talk, and the specific case of vorpal wasn't being asked, so it really doesn't account for much.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 25, 2008)

Zurai said:
			
		

> What infinite damage interpretation? No one's proposing that vorpal criticals do infinite damage.




Well, that depends.

Let's say I make an attack with my Vorpal Weapon and do not roll a critical. What is the maximum damage I can roll with the attack?

-Hyp.


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 25, 2008)

*damage die*

When you look up Damage die in the back of the boook, it directs you to Weapon damage Die (always represented as W) So, when it says Any Damage Die in vorpal weapons, does it mean Any Wespon damage die?

If so, if extra damage die of any kind that wasn't W (Hunters Quarry, Sneak, Devastating Critical, Critical Hit dice from magic weapons)- would not explode.

That combined with only allowing rolled dice, not automatically maximised dice, to explode, would mean you could only ever get ridiculous damage on a non-critical.

That is, unless it was High crit. High crit weapons get extra W dice on a crit, W dice are explodable.

Whether this is good or not I am not sure, but Vorpal weapons certainly should be no better than ordinary weapons of the same cost. Using both these rules (only W dice are explodable, and maximised dice on a crit are never explodable) would certainly keep them under control.


----------



## RefinedBean (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> As previously stated, Custserv doesn't answer in lawyer talk, and the specific case of vorpal wasn't being asked, so it really doesn't account for much.




So any answer from custserv isn't correct if it doesn't match your stance on the issue?

It's all we have as an official ruling from WotC, for right now.  It's good enough for me!  

But your houserule is still a good one, and it's definitely not a major issue in any case.

Here's hoping we'll get even MORE clarity on the issue, eh?


----------



## Andur (Jun 25, 2008)

Dlichen, I could say you are ignoriing the rules as well with your entire a dice roll isn't a dice roll theory... 

However take a +6 Magic Weapon and a +6 Vorpal, same weapon, same crit dice, compare damage, run it both ways with counting "maximized dice" being counted as rolled and also not rolled, the difference in damage will be 50-60% in favour of the Vorpal.  For an endgame item that is not too bad, instead of doing 40-50 points you will do 60-90 points...


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

I'm pretty sure somebody asked custserv and got that hunter's quarry, sneak, and devastating crit don't get rerolled since they are sources of damage not from the weapon.

I interpret Vorpal as saying that any die provided by the weapon is exploding, so that includes the d12s from the crit and the daily power. But I do agree that you can also read that as [w] die only.

I'm not sure it's necessary to keep them in control persay, since they aren't overpowered unless you go by the infinite rule and there's no other competitor for best magic weapon enhancement at the moment. Vorpal without the boost is still the best magic mod and far better than the others in terms of straight up damage.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Dlichen, I could say you are ignoriing the rules as well with your entire a dice roll isn't a dice roll theory...
> 
> However take a +6 Magic Weapon and a +6 Vorpal, same weapon, same crit dice, compare damage, run it both ways with counting "maximized dice" being counted as rolled and also not rolled, the difference in damage will be 50-60% in favour of the Vorpal.  For an endgame item that is not too bad, instead of doing 40-50 points you will do 60-90 points...




50%-60% on top of already being the best is slightly over the top.

And I'm not ignoring the rules if I'm pulling quotes straight from it aren't I?

If you go by laymen's terms:

Vorpal says to reroll die you roll, Crit hit says don't roll die -  clear case

If you're slightly rules lawyer:

You can only apply die mods to damage rolls

If you actually read the rules:

A critical hit is a damage roll without rolling die

The problem only occurs when you get halfway into legalese and stop AND you have to assume a contradiction in the rules.


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 25, 2008)

*thats what I mean*

Each weapon enhancement of the same cost should be roughly the same value for money. i can live with +6 Vorpal being a little better than, say, +6 dancing.

But if its majorly, hugely, better than any other enhancement with same price tag, something is wrong.

I'm guessing the theoretically infinite damage possibility on non-crits should work, since it says any rolled damage die that comes up max gets rerolled and the re-roll added it, and if it keeps coming up max, it keeps getting added in. Might prefer it if no reroll dice can explode, but if it doesn't say that, it doesn't say that.

But allowing actual infinite damage on a crit would be a mistake.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

hamishspence said:
			
		

> But allowing actual infinite damage on a crit would be a mistake.



The only people who are saying it would lead to infinite damage are misrepresenting the position of the people supporting rerolls on the base weapon damage for crits. No one "for" rerolls on crits has even suggested that the damage would be infinite. It's a strawman put up by the detractors.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

hamishspence said:
			
		

> Each weapon enhancement of the same cost should be roughly the same value for money. i can live with +6 Vorpal being a little better than, say, +6 dancing.
> 
> But if its majorly, hugely, better than any other enhancement with same price tag, something is wrong.
> 
> ...




Yeah, but nobody is arguing for actual infinite damage. It's just a loophole that opens up if you assume max damage counts as being rolled for a crit AND assume that max damage on a vorpal is infinite. It's a can of worms for the other side, but still not necessarily the definite case if they are correct.

Zurai, since you are here, could you respond to my claim? I am interested to see your take on it.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Zurai, since you are here, could you respond to my claim? I am interested to see your take on it.



I'd be happy to, but I'm not sure which claim you're referring to. I've not paid overmuch attention to this thread, since I've already done this argument once before and no one was convinced either way.


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 25, 2008)

*ah, I see*

I thought some were saying W dice on crit are maxed, and rerolled, and rerolls automatically maxed due to the critical max rule.

If thats not a serious position, it sems to me the questions are as follows.

1: When they say "damage die" do they just mean Weapon damage die, which is what you find when you use the back of the book to look it up, or can other dice be included?

2: if dice is automatically maxed on a crit, does that count as rolling maximum for the purposes of Vorpal?

3: When your reroll comes up maximum, does that automatically allow another reroll, and so on?

4: When Damage die consists of more than 1 die (2d4, for example) does the whole damage die have to be maximum for a reroll, or only one?

3(W) = (4-1)(4-4)(1-1): all 4s rerolled?
or, only (4-4) gets rerolled?


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Reposted for your convenience:



			
				DLichen said:
			
		

> The definition of damage roll arises because as implied by the box in 276, bonuses only apply to damage rolls and not damage in general. That's mostly poor positioning than actual writing, but it's there. The argument is that if you don't make a damage roll, you can never apply bonuses.
> 
> This is because the gamey definition of a damage roll is only a name. When you crit, you determine what damage you can do without actually rolling, this does not imply that crits are not damage rolls, merely that crits don't roll die. If you're going to apply the gamey definition of damage roll, you have to separate it from the normal definition. As unintuitive as it is, you can have a damage roll without rolling because you're using the game definition of damage roll which is weapon dice + bonuses.
> 
> The maximum damage you can roll with an attack is its damage roll, the damage roll definition does not imply that you copy the state of the dice when you calculate max damage.




As I understand your argument, you are saying that crit rolls must be a damage roll, I agree.

I don't agree that a damage roll implies that you must have rolled dice since it's only a name and the rules text implies that it is more than just rolls in the first place.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

hamishspence said:
			
		

> I thought some were saying W dice on crit are maxed, and rerolled, and rerolls automatically maxed due to the critical max rule.
> 
> If thats not a serious position, it sems to me the questions are as follows.
> 
> ...




No, the question is actually when a you get a crit, do you automatically get another x[W] roll for damage. IE: Do crits count as you having rolled max die or just a count of the damage.

I believe custserv has already answered that on a 2d4, any result of a 4 gets rerolled, but being custserv, it may not be 100% correct.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

Ah, I see.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Vorpal the only thing in the game that even refers to rolling dice past the "how to play the game" chapter?

I'll give you that "rolling damage" and "rolling dice" are not _necessarily_ the same thing. However, I'm more inclined to think that the only reason they used "dice" in the Vorpal weapon text is that it's the simplest way to describe the function of the weapon, rather than restricting it to only when you physically roll dice. It's clear that the dice are still involved in critical damage, since the number and size of the dice are what gets counted for the auto-max damage. Since the rules make little sense if you aren't considered to have rolled the damage, and rolling the damage involves rolling the dice, I interpret critical hits as having rolled maximum damage on the dice in the damage roll.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Zurai said:
			
		

> It's clear that the dice are still involved in critical damage, since the number and size of the dice are what gets counted for the auto-max damage.




I think that's the exact wrong assumption since critical hits specifically states not to roll die while vorpal triggers off die being rolled.

If it says specifically not that there is no dice roll and only a number (Maximum damage you could have done), I think it's unreasonable to assume that a critical hit also carries along the connotation of each die result being max, which is what Vorpal, as written, is supposed to check.

Without errata to Vorpal or critical hits, I think my interpretation of RAW is the only reasonable one.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> I think that's the exact wrong assumption since critical hits specifically states not to roll die while vorpal triggers off die being rolled.
> 
> If it says specifically not that there is no dice roll and only a number (Maximum damage you could have done), I think it's unreasonable to assume that a critical hit also carries along the connotation of each die result being max, which is what Vorpal, as written, is supposed to check.
> 
> Without errata to Vorpal or critical hits, I think my interpretation of RAW is the only reasonable one.



Actually, critical hits say nothing about dice. Nothing at all. They say not to roll _damage_, which is more general and more severe.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

It says Rather than roll damage, determine the maximum damage your attack can do.

The damage your attack can do is keyed off your damage roll, so it's still logically sound to take your damage roll and remove randomness.

It still opposes the any die results being made to trigger vorpal.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> It says Rather than roll damage, determine the maximum damage your attack can do.



And how do you do that if you're ignoring dice? You have to look at the number and size of the dice used by the attack in order to determine the maximum damage the attack could do.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

I didn't say to ignore dice, just that you still never rolled any.

As before, even knowing the type of die you are rolling is enough to determine max damage.


----------



## Victoly (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> If you actually read the rules:
> 
> A critical hit is a damage roll without rolling die.



If you actually read the rules, a critical hit isn't a roll at all.  
"Rather than roll damage..."


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Victoly said:
			
		

> If you actually read the rules, a critical hit isn't a roll at all.
> "Rather than roll damage..."




It's not a roll in the sense that you roll die.

It must be a roll because it's implied that you have to make a damage roll to add modifiers. If you ignore the fact that you HAVE to make a damage roll to add mods, your interpretation is the most logical conclusion. I put the blame entirely on the poor layout of the damage roll section.


----------



## pinbot (Jun 25, 2008)

wow...still going eh?

Okay, add one vote for the "Determining the maximum value of a die is not in any sense of the word rolling the die" and that the critical hit rule expressly says "rather than roll" and the vorpal rule says "whenever you roll" so there is no way that base weapon damage dice are ever vorpalized.  And indeed it seems they were very careful with "rather than roll" and "whenever you roll" to make sure that this exact question never came up.  So...how did it come up? lol  all imnsho of course


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> I put the blame entirely on the poor layout of the damage roll section.



I can definitely get behind this, regardless of the actual intent of vorpal and criticals. It's really hard to interpret intent of the rules when the rules don't even always agree with each other as written.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Pinbot, and other users, please read the thread before posting so that you don't reiterate old arguments.

I would like to think the 10+ pages in this thread are more informative than that considering how many posts I have in there. 

@ Zurai

Even so, while easily confused, I think the current wording does imply the case where you don't roll another set of weapon die on a crit.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> @ Zurai
> 
> Even so, while easily confused, I think the current wording does imply the case where you don't roll another set of weapon die on a crit.



I, obviously, disagree 

I agree that there's room for interpretation counter to mine and I can't really state with absolute conviction that this other interpretation is wrong - I just believe it to be so. I believe my interpretation is the correct one, especially because it seems to fall in line with the general "say yes" theme presented by 4E. But I know I'm not likely to sway anyone that I havn't already, and in reality the issue isn't likely to come up in any of my games for a long time to come, if ever. So, I'm going to let it lie.

On a more personal note: Thank you, DLichen, for having a nice, calm, measured debate. It restores some of my faith in the ability to have an actual discussion with opposing views (as opposed to an argument that ends up in a flamewar) on the internet.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Well, I agree that you are right to say that the RAI could be something else, the fact that no RAW arguments have toppled my interpretation does imply that as written, mine is the correct one until errata appears. But I'll leave it at that since it's now more about personal conviction than written rules.

And it has also been a pleasure debating with you Zurai.


----------



## melkoriii (Jun 25, 2008)

you dont reroll the die because you never rolled them in the first place nor are they considered just mexed roll.  Its Max damage.

Note how damage and crit damage is noted on a character sheet.

Damage          crit
2d4+str           8+str


See no dies even noted for the crit.  Just a number

16 pages of close minded stubbornness all to just have a debate.

Debate is over.  Wait for WotC to clerify (not CS junk heads since you will get a different answer then the next guy asking the same question)


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 25, 2008)

Zurai said:
			
		

> The only people who are saying it would lead to infinite damage are misrepresenting the position of the people supporting rerolls on the base weapon damage for crits. No one "for" rerolls on crits has even suggested that the damage would be infinite. It's a strawman put up by the detractors.




I'm not arguing that crits allow rerolls.  I'm asking what the maximum damage a non-critical attack with a vorpal weapon can deal is.

Let's use a hypothetical power as an example.  Call it "Reversal of Catastrophe", say.

The power deals 1d8 damage on a hit.  Special: If the d8 comes up '1', the attack deals +8 damage.

How much damage does the power deal on a critical hit?

-Hyp.


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 25, 2008)

*put me in the "if dice are not rolling, dice are not vorpalizing" camp*

My question is more Do only (W) dice count for vorpalization (so the 6d12 critical, the 3d12 bonus dice used with daily power, etc, don't?)

By the fact that it says explicitly: Weapon die, and when you look it up in the back of the book, it directs you to Weapon damage Die, expessed as (W), that would appear to be the answer.

Is there anything in the book that would contradict this definition of Weapon die being only (W) dice?


----------



## Zurai (Jun 25, 2008)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I'm not arguing that crits allow rerolls.  I'm asking what the maximum damage a non-critical attack with a vorpal weapon can deal is.



Sorry, Hyp. I didn't see your post on this earlier - like I said, I havn't been paying that much attention to this thread (except when DLichen specifically asked for my input). I was mostly skimming and must have just skimmed right past your post.

I see what you're saying - critical hits don't say that you roll the maximum damage, but rather that you determine what the maximum damage you could deal would be. In your hypothetical, that would be 9, rather than 8. I agree with that.

I also see what you're pointing out, that vorpal weapons don't _have_ a maximum damage - their damage is theoretically infinite. So I guess someone actually was saying that vorpal crits deal infinite damage.

For my sanity, I'm going to say if it ever comes up in one of my games that the "maximum damage" clause comes up before considering vorpal's unique property. It's a cop-out, but there are few things I hate worse in games than infinite loops.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

hamishspence said:
			
		

> My question is more Do only (W) dice count for vorpalization (so the 6d12 critical, the 3d12 bonus dice used with daily power, etc, don't?)
> 
> By the fact that it says explicitly: Weapon die, and when you look it up in the back of the book, it directs you to Weapon damage Die, expessed as (W), that would appear to be the answer.
> 
> Is there anything in the book that would contradict this definition of Weapon die being only (W) dice?




You are making the assumption that damage die as referenced by vorpal means weapon damage die through the glossary. While reasonable, it not necessarily the case since vorpal doesn't imply weapon damage die, only damage die.

You could interpret damage die as any die the vorpal weapon provides, including the d12s from the crit and the powers, or limit it to [w] only. Judgement call, but I prefer the former.


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 25, 2008)

*Concerning non-critical hits with a vorpal weapon*

The wording is "If a reroll results in another maximum damage result, roll it again and keep adding"

So, with 2(W) greatsword, it could look like this:
(10, 10) rr (10, 10) rr (9, 10) rr (10) rr (9) stop rolling.

so, yes, theoretically infinite. Not much chance of it actually happening though.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

If you're willing to get lax with the rules to accept the crits count as rolling max damage, which I still disagree with btw, then you can also rule that the extra die from vorpal are granted by the critical, and by the extra damage rule, does not get auto maxed.

"Extra Damage: Magic weapons and implements, as
well as high crit weapons, can increase the damage
you deal when you score a critical hit. If this extra
damage is a die roll, it’s not automatically maximum
damage; you add the result of the roll."


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 25, 2008)

*the definition of damage die*

the index directed me straight to weapon damge die, not sure what the glossary says.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Vorpal does not link to the back.

It also states "Whenever you roll the maximum result on any damage die for this weapon" - which implies that some weapons have multiple die.

Since weapons only have one damage die, the vorpal damage die is not necessarily the more common weapon damage die.

Again, this is not foolproof, I am just saying that there is room for interpretation in this one, unlike the vorpal crit rule.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 25, 2008)

hamishspence said:
			
		

> so, yes, theoretically infinite. Not much chance of it actually happening though.




How likely it is isn't the issue.

When you roll a critical, you determine what the maximum damage of the attack (excluding crit-only effects) is, and that's how much you deal.  Then you add crit-only effects on top.

The maximum damage of an attack with a Vorpal Weapon  (excluding crit-only effects) is infinite, however unlikely it is that you'd roll that on ∞d8.  So the damage dealt by a critical with a Vorpal Weapon is infinite... +6d12.

This isn't based on assuming that you rolled an 8, which you then rerolled and got another 8, which you then rerolled and got another 8.  It's not assuming you roll any dice at all, because the critical doesn't involve rolling dice.

What the critical _does_ involve is determining the maximum damage you could have dealt if you _did_ roll.  And the maximum damage you could have dealt if you _did_ roll would be if you rolled an 8, which you then rerolled and got another 8, which you then rerolled and got another 8, and so on forever.

-Hyp.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Damge roll:
Roll the damage indicated in the power description.
If you’re using a weapon for the attack, the damage is
some multiple of your weapon damage dice.

The vorpal bonus is not strictly speaking, part of the damage roll that is counted when a critical hit triggers. So when you maximize, it's clearly without the vorpal, no matter what camp you are in about rolling more [w] after.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Damge roll:
> Roll the damage indicated in the power description.
> If you’re using a weapon for the attack, the damage is
> some multiple of your weapon damage dice.
> ...




How does "add the additional result to the damage total" differ from, say, "your attacks deal extra damage"?

Sneak Attack doesn't reference the damage roll, merely says the attack deals extra damage.  The definition of Damage Roll doesn't reference sneak attack, merely "some multiple of your weapon damage dice".

And yet Sneak Attack is included in "the maximum damage you can roll with your attack" when calculating a critical.  If "your attacks deal extra damage" is included in the calculation, why not "add the additional result to the damage total"?  Both figure in to the damage you can roll with your attack.  Neither are directly the result of a critical.

-Hyp.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Because sneak attack damage gets dealt no matter what your dice comes up as.

Vorpal only triggers when you roll dice well, and since critical hits is what caused you to roll well, it could fall under Extra Damage since it's partly triggered off the critical hit itself, since it would only come up due to the crit's effects, in this case maxed damage.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Vorpal only triggers when you roll dice well, and since critical hits is what caused you to roll well, it could fall under Extra Damage since it's partly triggered off the critical hit itself, since it would only come up due to the crit's effects, in this case maxed damage.




The crit's effect is to deal the maximum damage you could have rolled.

If you deal 2d8 damage, +1d6 on a critical, then the maximum you could have rolled without a critical is 16.  It's impossible for you to roll 22 without a critical, so the critical takes the basic maximum (16), and then adds the crit-only effect.

If you use a Vorpal Weapon, then the maximum you could have rolled without a critical is infinite.  Thus, infinite damage is not crit-dependent, and it's the maximum value you use before you add the 6d12.

The critical hit didn't cause me to roll well.  The critical allowed me to simply deal the maximum damage I would deal if I _had_ rolled well.

The critical calculation doesn't require assuming that you've just rolled infinite 8s.  It simply takes the value you could have achieved, given that it's _possible_ to roll infinite 8s.

Did you see the analogy I posted earlier, with the fictitious "Reversal of Catastrophe" power?  The critical doesn't assume I rolled the highest possible on the die.  It doesn't assume I rolled a 1.  It merely takes the maximum damage that attack could deal if it were not a critical.

It happens that, in this case, the maximum damage that attack could deal occurs if the attacker rolls a 1 on the d8.  But the critical doesn't require rolling a 1 on the d8; it merely deals the maximum damage that the non-crit-rolling attacker could deal, which happens to be the damage he'd get by rolling a 1.

-Hyp.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

The damage roll rules says only weapon die + bonuses

The vorpal bonus doesn't get added until you roll the die. You never roll the die - ergo, you can't add vorpal die.

You are using the a different definition of maximum damage your attack can do.

The flow goes:

1. Hit, rolled a 20
2. Damage roll step - [w] + bonuses - max w without rolling
3. Max damage is w+bonuses
4. Vorpal - did I roll dice? No, no extra vorpal die
5. w+bonuses + 6d12 + other crit die

The vorpal die simply don't exist when you calculate the damage roll.

EDIT: My actual rules position is much weaker in this one as seen by the fact that I used nonexistent timing rules, so I won't argue anymore since Smurph presents a raw interpretation that could work depending on the definition of maximum damage an attack could do which isn't actually that crystal clear. This is a time to use the sanity check.


----------



## Andur (Jun 25, 2008)

Except of course a critical hit counts as maximum damage with maximum results on all dice rolls.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

Andur, saying that doesn't prove it. If you can provide a decent reason why you think that way, go for it. But I'm sick of you repeating the statement without countering any of the arguments against it.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 25, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> The damage roll rules says only weapon die + bonuses
> 
> The vorpal bonus doesn't get added until you roll the die. You never roll the die - ergo, you can't add vorpal die.




But if you _did_ roll the dice, you might get to roll the vorpal dice, so when you're determining the maximum damage the attack could deal, they need to be considered.

Ignore the critical for a moment.  Assume you _didn't_ get a critical.  There is no critical here.  If you're using a Vorpal Weapon, what is the maximum damage you could roll with the attack?

-Hyp.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 25, 2008)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> The maximum damage of an attack with a Vorpal Weapon  (excluding crit-only effects) is infinite, however unlikely it is that you'd roll that on ∞d8.  So the damage dealt by a critical with a Vorpal Weapon is infinite... +6d12.
> 
> -Hyp.




I knew I could count on you, Hype.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 25, 2008)

As I already stated Smurph, this devolves into a nonexistent timing rule debate. The case with crits is different from non crits solely because there is a break where you calculate crit damage and when you add vorpal die.

You can argue it your way by RAW, it's true.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 25, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> I knew I could count on you, Hype.




Well, when I saw people posting "Nobody's arguing that X...", it seemed that there was a niche in the market for someone with X to sell!  

-Hyp.


----------



## Kaodi (Jun 26, 2008)

I am not going to bother reading all 18 pages to see if it has been mentioned: Vorpal Blade Cascade, anyone?


----------



## Andur (Jun 26, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> Andur, saying that doesn't prove it. If you can provide a decent reason why you think that way, go for it. But I'm sick of you repeating the statement without countering any of the arguments against it.




I dunno, maybe that CServ quote which you choose to disregard...

IT gets back to a simple thing, if you don't roll dice by proxy in a critical hit than you do not do a damage roll, if you don't do a damage roll than you do not count anything but weapon damage and ability modifier.  Since we all know that you do include feat, power, enhancement, and unnamed bonuses to crit damage, then we know that a damage roll took place.  For a damage roll to happen dice have to be rolled, even if by proxy "rolling them until they come to maximum value".  Which is precisely what the CServ answer is stating.

Carry on with your rantings of no proof and silly "rolls are not rolls" mantra though.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 26, 2008)

Someone else along with me has already responded to the custserv quote which can't be used for close rules references since it doesn't pertain to the situation at hand.

The damage roll thing has already been countered by me multiple times, not once of which you have countered.


----------



## Andur (Jun 26, 2008)

A ruling on the wording of critical hits doesn't pertain to if die are rolled during a critical hit?

Interesting...


----------



## DLichen (Jun 26, 2008)

A ruling critical hits that doesn't deal with vorpal at all probably shouldn't be used to argue vorpal rules, yes.


----------



## Lurker37 (Jun 26, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure somebody asked custserv and got that hunter's quarry, sneak, and devastating crit don't get rerolled since they are sources of damage not from the weapon.




Here's a contradiction from another customer service rep
I asked:


> If you score a critical hit with a Vorpal Weapon (+6), and due to the critical hit take all weapon dice as if they had rolled maximum, do those automatically maximised weapon dice get rerolled due to the 'reroll on maximum' property of the vorpal weapon, or does the fact that the dice were not physically rolled mean it does not apply?
> 
> Do any of the weapon's 'critical: +6d12' dice get rerolled if they come up maximum?
> 
> ...




They replied



> Response (Support Agent) 06/25/2008 09:42 AM
> 
> XXXX,
> 
> Exactly as you said, crits with a vorpal weapon do not get the max die reroll as the dice were never actually rolled.  Any damage dice rolled when hitting with a vorpal weapon are eligible to be rerolled when they come up as the maximum result. This includes the extra crit dice, the dice from the daily power, dice from Hunter's Quarry, etc.  Also, the daily power dice are maxed on a crit just like damage from any power.  Let me know if you have any more questions!




I've fired back a query on this contadicting the rules on 276, and asking when to apply which definition of 'rolling'. That should stir things up a little.

In short, not much faith in this answer.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 26, 2008)

Yep, another good reason to never read too deeply into custserv rules. They are there to help keep your game going, not to pick between specifics.


----------



## Andur (Jun 26, 2008)

> Originally Posted by DLichen
> I'm pretty sure somebody asked custserv and got that hunter's quarry, sneak, and devastating crit don't get rerolled since they are sources of damage not from the weapon.




Any attack which uses the Weapon keyword has all damage done by the weapon.  But that is probably another whole thread.

Thanks for the info Lurker, for now, it would appear that CServ has some internal clarifications needed.  BTW, can you post what you asked CServ?

Until something else from CServ comes out or errata, looks like the rolls not being rolls but yet counting as rolls school of thought is the current answer.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 26, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Any attack which uses the Weapon keyword has all damage done by the weapon.  But that is probably another whole thread.
> 
> Thanks for the info Lurker, for now, it would appear that CServ has some internal clarifications needed.  BTW, can you post what you asked CServ?
> 
> Until something else from CServ comes out or errata, looks like the rolls not being rolls but yet counting as rolls school of thought is the current answer.




Hahaha, ok.

Man, that sounds stupid when you say it like that. I agree, errata for clarification needs to come out soon.


----------



## Andur (Jun 26, 2008)

See we can be friends after all.   

BTW sorry for being snarky yesterday, real life flowover to the boards...


----------



## Caliban (Jun 26, 2008)

I've submitted this question to Customer Service.  If I get an answer, I'll post it here.  



> The Vorpal Weapon Property(page 236) states: "Whenever you roll the maximum result on any damge die for this weapon, roll that die again and add the additional result to the damage total. If a reroll results in another maximum damage result, roll it again and keep adding."
> 
> The Critical Hits (Maximum Damage) entry (Page 278) states: "Rather than roll damage, determine the maximum damage you can roll with your attack. This is your critical damage..."
> 
> ...


----------



## Ten (Jun 26, 2008)

I did ask custserv yesterday;  Here is their reply.



> Response (Support Agent)	06/25/2008 07:34 AM
> Caleb,
> 
> You do not roll damage in a critical hit, so all of the automatically maximized damage will not benefit from the Vorpal weapon's property.
> ...




Interestingly enough, I was of the opposite opinion...


----------



## Goolpsy (Jun 26, 2008)

Now to a real issue:  If we ask Custserv 10 times: How many will say A and how many will say B? and how many really understand the difference ?


----------



## Caliban (Jun 26, 2008)

Ten said:
			
		

> I did ask custserv yesterday;  Here is their reply.




Since it agrees with my reading of the rules, I find relying on Cust Serv acceptable in this instance (while reserving the right to discount any future answers I find unacceptable).


----------



## DClown (Jun 26, 2008)

Oh thank god.  Now we just have a few more pages of people complaining that CS isn't consistent or the book was badly edited, or the edition as a whole sucks or whatever they need to say to convince themselves they were not 'wrong' and the thread can finally die.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 26, 2008)

It's already two consistent answers, we're on a streak here.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 26, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> I've submitted this question to Customer Service.




I'm glad to see the +6d12 made it into option 1 

-Hyp.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 26, 2008)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I'm glad to see the +6d12 made it into option 1
> 
> -Hyp.




I felt that I would have done you a disservice if it wasn't included.


----------



## gnfnrf (Jun 26, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> I've submitted this question to Customer Service.  If I get an answer, I'll post it here.




Isn't there a fourth option?  I could have sworn I'd seen folk in this thread arguing that, while you took the maximum result on the weapon dice, you rolled them anyway, simply to check to see if they exploded.

That is to say,  you roll the weapon damage, replace it with max damage, and reroll any dice from the roll you skipped if they showed max, even though you didn't need to use them.

While the rules support for this option is weak, it seems to preserve the relationship between a regular hit and a crit nicely, without accidentally causing infinite plus 6d12 damage.

--
gnfnrf


----------



## DLichen (Jun 26, 2008)

Quite simply, that option has no rule support at all, but is a nice houserule option if you want to make vorpal crits more deadly.

It would be pointless to ask, since it definitely won't be the correct option according to the rules, but it's not a bad idea if your players demand it.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 26, 2008)

gnfnrf said:
			
		

> Isn't there a fourth option?  I could have sworn I'd seen folk in this thread arguing that, while you took the maximum result on the weapon dice, you rolled them anyway, simply to check to see if they exploded.
> 
> That is to say,  you roll the weapon damage, replace it with max damage, and reroll any dice from the roll you skipped if they showed max, even though you didn't need to use them.
> 
> ...





If you don't like how I worded the question, feel free to send a question in yourself.


----------



## gnfnrf (Jun 26, 2008)

Caliban said:
			
		

> If you don't like how I worded the question, feel free to send a question in yourself.




I didn't mean to impugn your question writing ability.  In fact, I appreciated that, after nineteen pages of debate, you spelled out the  positions clearly.  I just wanted to make sure that here in the record of this thread, all of the positions were recapped.

Of course, I'm not even sure anyone else suggested that.  The debate got pretty esoteric.

--
gnfnrf


----------



## Lurker37 (Jun 26, 2008)

Andur said:
			
		

> Thanks for the info Lurker, for now, it would appear that CServ has some internal clarifications needed.  BTW, can you post what you asked CServ?




Edited into my original post, but here it is again.



> If you score a critical hit with a Vorpal Weapon (+6), and due to the critical hit take all weapon dice as if they had rolled maximum, do those automatically maximised weapon dice get rerolled due to the 'reroll on maximum' property of the vorpal weapon, or does the fact that the dice were not physically rolled mean it does not apply?
> 
> Do any of the weapon's 'critical: +6d12' dice get rerolled if they come up maximum?
> 
> ...




Hmm. On re-reading it maybe I didn't quite aim the question at my biggest problem - the disparity between this and the rules on page 276.



			
				Andur said:
			
		

> Until something else from CServ comes out or errata, looks like the rolls not being rolls but yet counting as rolls school of thought is the current answer.




Yes, this way of putting it is why I am among those surprised by the answer. The concept of what is and is not considered a roll just became a little more difficult for me to wrap my head around. No matter which way I look at it there's a general inconsistency that bothers me, and I'm worried about encountering more of this sort of contradiction as more powers and items are released.


----------



## hong (Jun 26, 2008)

Onwards to page 20!

Quick, there's only a few more hours!


----------



## hong (Jun 26, 2008)

Lurker37 said:
			
		

> Yes, this way of putting it is why I am among those surprised by the answer. The concept of what is and is not considered a roll just became a little more difficult for me to wrap my head around. No matter which way I look at it there's a general inconsistency that bothers me, and I'm worried about encountering more of this sort of contradiction as more powers and items are released.




A crit is a maximised roll.

It really is that simple. The conniptions come in trying to turn plain language into legalese.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 26, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> A crit is a maximised roll.
> 
> It really is that simple. The conniptions come in trying to turn plain language into legalese.




No, it is not, the least you could do is not spread misinformation.

The only backing to that statement is the half-assed legalese. If you take everything at face value, what you suggest still won't work.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 26, 2008)

DLichen said:
			
		

> No, it is not, the least you could do is not spread misinformation.
> 
> The only backing to that statement is the half-assed legalese. If you take everything at face value, what you suggest still won't work.




I don't think it's fair to accuse Hong of trying to spread misinformation (at least, not in the rules forum).   

I think he honestly believes what he is saying.   Last night I said I couldn't understand his arguement, but after sleeping on it,  I think I understand his point of view better.    (I still disagree with him, but I think I understand how he came to his conclusion.)


----------



## hong (Jun 26, 2008)

Yay! Page 20!


----------



## Caliban (Jun 26, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Yay! Page 20!





Your childish glee touches my bitter black heart.

Stop it.


----------



## Caliban (Jun 27, 2008)

I received a response from WOTC Customer service (to add to the ones we already have).



> Thank you for contacting us. Explanation # 2 is the most accurate. For this example we will use a +6 Vorpal Longsword. When I score a critical hit using this weapon, I will not be rolling damage, I will just determine the maximum damage I could roll with my attack. This alone does not trigger the Vorpal Property. However Because I scored a critical hit I need to roll 1d12 for every plus my weapon has. This is extra damage so it is not automatically maximized. Since my sword is + 6, I will roll 6d12. If I roll a 12 on any of these dice, this will trigger the Vorpal property, and you will rereoll the dice that rolled 12, so on and so forth. I hope this information is useful.
> 
> Good Gaming!
> 
> ...


----------



## erik_the_guy (Jun 27, 2008)

Well that seems to settle it, thanks for the answer guys...
and the 20 pages of arguing...
it reminds me of playing D&D!
Well at least I got the answer before my group got to level 30


----------



## Hambot (Jun 27, 2008)

I found Hong's interpretation made the most sense, along with the first custservice guy who said that you treat criticals as if you had rolled maximum on every dice.  Hong argues that the only reason why the book says "don't roll dice" for the critical is to save you some time from doing a pointless roll, but then this has flowed on to become a logic trap for a completely literal interpretation of the Vorpal weapon interaction with the critical hit rules.  As written from a legal point of view, you haven't rolled dice so you don't get the vorpal fun.  But it doesn't feel right to me.

I'll be satisfied when one of the designers mentions it somewhere - I am interested in their opinion as they know what the damn thing is supposed to do as a level 30 weapon.  I'm not interested in custserv providing a purely literal interpretation of the rules, that is self evident from reading them like a computer.

If the designers have time to talk about dragonborn breasts, they have time for this.


----------



## Ibixat (Jun 27, 2008)

ok I read 15 pages then skipped to 20, I think the vorpal weapon simply needs some calrified eratta to make it make sense to everyone.  I also feel that according to the PHB statement of "Rather than roll damage, determine the maximum result you can roll with your attack. This is your critical damage." that technically a vorpal weapon's crit is infinite, but that would basically just be flat broken.  The keyword there of course in the description being CAN before roll.  Statisticly a small non-zero chance of it happening, a very small non-zero chance ok, a nearly infinitely small non-zero chance.

I think though for most cases you'll be doing plenty of damage on the attack based on the +6d12 crit dice. Too bad your chances of getting one re-roll on those is only 50%.  Also the crit on any of those simple 2[w] attacks will be quite a big boost from the weapon just from the 6d12 alone.

Oh and hi, I'm new here, nice to meet everyone


----------



## sirtayls (Jun 28, 2008)

this could very well be the most fun reads I've had on the net in quite some time.  kudos to everyone with an opinion and for keeping your opinion in check with the tempers. mostly.


----------



## Victoly (Jun 28, 2008)

Hambot said:


> I found Hong's interpretation made the most sense, along with the first custservice guy who said that you treat criticals as if you had rolled maximum on every dice.  Hong argues that the only reason why the book says "don't roll dice" for the critical is to save you some time from doing a pointless roll, but then this has flowed on to become a logic trap for a completely literal interpretation of the Vorpal weapon interaction with the critical hit rules.  As written from a legal point of view, you haven't rolled dice so you don't get the vorpal fun.  But it doesn't feel right to me.



The +6d12 damage you get to roll on a crit is quite a bit of "vorpal fun" in my opinion, and it seems roughly balanced with the other level 30 weapons and their respective effects.  Ultimately this is probably going to require some errata/clarification before we know for sure, but I'm pretty sure we all have an idea of how we'll run it in our own games, at least.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 28, 2008)

The problem I have with "Oh it's fine it does +6d12 on a crit" is that there's a level 27 weapon that also does 6d12 on a crit.


----------



## Zsig (Jun 28, 2008)

Zurai said:


> The problem I have with "Oh it's fine it does +6d12 on a crit" is that there's a level 27 weapon that also does 6d12 on a crit.




Except that that lvl 27 weapon doesn't allow you to reroll the dice, which is well worth +2 lvls by itself, nor does it grants you an ability to strike for another +3d12 once per day, which is well worth another +1 lvl.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 28, 2008)

Zsig said:


> Except that that lvl 27 weapon doesn't allow you to reroll the dice which is well worth +2 lvls by itself, nor does it grants you an ability to strike for another +3d12 on per day which is well worth another +1 lvl.



It does just as much damage (the majority of the time) on a crit as a Vorpal weapon, and Vorpal weapons have _always_, in every edition, been "lethal if it crits" weapons.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 28, 2008)

I think it's far better as the best damage enhancement you can get in 4e than the marginal enhancement it was in 3e.

If you want to bring back the flavor, you'll probably have to make it weaker on per hit basis since vorpal is just that good already. The extra x[W] die is just needless.


----------



## Zsig (Jun 28, 2008)

Zurai said:


> It does just as much damage (the majority of the time) on a crit as a Vorpal weapon, and Vorpal weapons have _always_, in every edition, been "lethal if it crits" weapons.




And they still are.

Keep in mind that a +X Vicious Weapon is in no other way different than a "regular" +X Weapon other than the critical.
That's the main attractive in it. It deals huge amounts of damage on criticals.

Vorpal is not different. It is still lethal on a crit, as they always have been, and now they're also lethal when you don't crit.
And that, along with the criticals, is the attractive on Vorpals


----------



## Zurai (Jun 28, 2008)

Zsig said:


> And they still are.
> 
> Keep in mind that a +X Vicious Weapon is in no other way different than a "regular" +X Weapon other than the critical.
> 
> ...




OK, let me rephrase for the people that intentionally miss the point.

Vorpal weapons have always been the single weapon you don't want to get crit by. They're the _most_ lethal crit weapon. They really aren't, anymore, if you take the convoluted "rolls are rolls except when they aren't rolls but they still allow you to add stuff that's only added to rolls" interpretation.


----------



## DLichen (Jun 28, 2008)

They still are the most lethal crit weapon. 6d12 with exploding d12s is strictly better than plain 6d12.

Let me reiterate - vorpal was BAD in 3e, overpriced and of limited utility. Vorpal is amazing and hands down the best in 4e.

I think your fondness of snickersnack, off goes the head, is clouding your judgement of the rules on this one.


----------



## Zsig (Jun 28, 2008)

Zurai said:


> OK, let me rephrase for the people that intentionally miss the point.




This.



			
				DLichen said:
			
		

> They still are the most lethal crit weapon. 6d12 with exploding d12s is strictly better than plain 6d12.
> 
> Let me reiterate - vorpal was BAD in 3e, overpriced and of limited utility. Vorpal is amazing and hands down the best in 4e.
> 
> I think your fondness of snickersnack, off goes the head, is clouding your judgement of the rules on this one.




And this.

Obviously, I'm not the one missing the point here.


----------



## Zurai (Jun 28, 2008)

Ah yes, I remember why I stopped responding to this thread, now. Less rules debates and more snerts.


----------



## Branduil (Jun 28, 2008)

I'm really beginning to dislike the way they phrased the rule for critical hits. It creates soooo many inconsistencies and potential problems.


----------

