| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hatred has nothing to do with Favored Enemy.
Vicious weapon property: You are not attacking yourself.
Confusion: You are attacking yourself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Favored enemy is not necessarily a hatred but anatomical knowledge. It only reflects that you know where to hit.
A hunter who hunts animals to feed his family will probably have animals as his favored enemies, but I don't see a reason for which he'd hate his source of nourishment.
In confussion spells or the vicious weapon, the damage is somewhat fixed, so modifiers to anything else than strength wouldn't count. If you performed the aforementionated coup de grâce on yourself the favores enemy should be taken into account as you are making a real attack against yourself.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Confusion is not an attack against yourself. It is simply 'hurt yourself for 1d8+str'. There is no bonuses to the damage applied.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe it is a drawback trait but you can only pick it up between the ages of 13-19 after listening to too many dirge bards.
|
Vicious weapon property: You are not attacking yourself.
Confusion: You are attacking yourself.
Wording of Ranger Favored Enemy doesn't require "attacking." It will still add weapon damage without "attacking," at least as written.
Vicious weapon is pretty clear that the damage dealt to self is from the weapon. Seems difficult to argue that favored enemy wouldn't apply, at least in a RAW debate. Lady-J is probably right, though, that despite the RAW, it would be ignored in most games.
As for confusion, the wording is lacking, but it does say that the damage caused by "item in hand" which potentially could qualify as weapon damage, though that one is more iffy than the vicious weapon property's wording. Confusion is confusing...
Just because you get a bonus does not mean you always have to take it. This is why the spell Confusion specifically states that you include your STR modifier to damage. If you have to apply all bonuses that would mean that someone who is good at combat cannot teach someone else. For example a high level fighter with a good STR and weapon specialization is going to take down his student with every hit. Even if he uses nonlethal damage he is going to knock out a first level character he is training every time he hits, and will hit 95% of the time.
If you are voluntarily attacking yourself for some reason you could include your favored enemy bonus, but in most cases you do not need to.
RAW:
At 1st level, a ranger selects a creature type from the ranger favored enemies table. He gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks against creatures of his selected type. Likewise, he gets a +2 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against them. A ranger may make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify these creatures.
If there is a damage roll against a target that matches one of your favored enemies, you add the damage bonus.
That said, and venturing into opinion/RAI:
While some argue (as I do myself) that the point of 'Favored Enemy' is not that you hate them so much you are able to do more damage, only that you have studied them so well that you know their weaknesses, and that you would surely not do that to yourself, I would say that for some magical effects you most definitely would.
For example, under the effects of Confusion, you would not, in my opinion, be in your right mind and therefore would most definitely apply full damage.
For the Vicious weapon property however, because the damage comes from the "flash of disruptive energy", and not because you are striking yourself, I would rule against applying the Favored Enemy bonus.
Vicious wouldn't apply the extra damage for the same reason it isn't affected by DR, it's untyped energy damage rather than weapon damage.
As for confusion, the wording is lacking, but it does say that the damage caused by "item in hand" which potentially could qualify as weapon damage, though that one is more iffy than the vicious weapon property's wording. Confusion is confusing...
Confusion isn't that confusing. It says it does 1d8+Strength bonus. That's quite sufficient and complete. Leave it at that.
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if the item in hand is a weapon or not. The damage inflicted is the damage inflicted whether it, as a weapon, would do 1d4 or 2d6. The fact that it does a potentially different and specific amount of damage kind of tells us that, if it is a weapon, it isn't being used in the normal way anyway. So why should there be any expectation that a weapon would bring any of its special abilities or a character with weapon-based special abilities into play?
|
|
Just because you get a bonus does not mean you always have to take it. This is why the spell Confusion specifically states that you include your STR modifier to damage. If you have to apply all bonuses that would mean that someone who is good at combat cannot teach someone else. For example a high level fighter with a good STR and weapon specialization is going to take down his student with every hit. Even if he uses nonlethal damage he is going to knock out a first level character he is training every time he hits, and will hit 95% of the time.
I'm under the impression game mechanically that you can't reduce your damage output voluntarily without feats or abilities that specify this.
As for teaching, I'm unclear here, but I do think it's likely that a much higher level teacher would remain hands off until their student got strong enough for actual sparing. I think it's done like this in real life, too.
As for confusion, the wording is lacking, but it does say that the damage caused by "item in hand" which potentially could qualify as weapon damage, though that one is more iffy than the vicious weapon property's wording. Confusion is confusing...Confusion isn't that confusing. It says it does 1d8+Strength bonus. That's quite sufficient and complete. Leave it at that.
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if the item in hand is a weapon or not. The damage inflicted is the damage inflicted whether it, as a weapon, would do 1d4 or 2d6. The fact that it does a potentially different and specific amount of damage kind of tells us that, if it is a weapon, it isn't being used in the normal way anyway. So why should there be any expectation that a weapon would bring any of its special abilities or a character with weapon-based special abilities into play?
It is my understanding that the Favored Enemy and Favored Terrain abilities always function in pathfinder, even if the character is unaware that the setting/creature qualifies as their favored one.
In example, a vampire disguised as a human. The Favored Enemy Undead Ranger still gains their favored enemy bonuses, even if the disguise isn't pierced. The GM may be applying these bonuses secretly, of course.
So if the item in hand is a weapon, and the damage is dealt to their favored enemy, does seem like it would apply. More so, that it MUST apply.
|
|
Vicious wouldn't apply the extra damage for the same reason it isn't affected by DR, it's untyped energy damage rather than weapon damage.
Hm....that is a fair point. So for clarity, if the source of the damage is a weapon, that doesn't automatically make it weapon damage? But if the source of damage is a spell, that does automatically make it magic damage, right?
It is my understanding that the Favored Enemy and Favored Terrain abilities always function in pathfinder, even if the character is unaware that the setting/creature qualifies as their favored one.
In example, a vampire disguised as a human. The Favored Enemy Undead Ranger still gains their favored enemy bonuses, even if the disguise isn't pierced. The GM may be applying these bonuses secretly, of course.
So if the item in hand is a weapon, and the damage is dealt to their favored enemy, does seem like it would apply. More so, that it MUST apply.
What difference does the object in the hand make if, ultimately, everything could be an improvised weapon? Do you add weapon specialization too if the PC is specialized in that weapon in their hand? How about a flaming property? What if they've got a sword in one hand and a rose in the other? Can the player say, "Oh, no. It's not the tricked out sword I'm using, it's the rose," and avoid all of the add-ons the sword would inflict? Should they get that choice? Whose choice is it?
All of these factors were known to the people writing the effects of the confusion spell and they chose to not refer to them. Better to just take confusion at its word and apply 1d8+Strength bonus.
|
|
What difference does the object in the hand make if, ultimately, everything could be an improvised weapon? Do you add weapon specialization too if the PC is specialized in that weapon in their hand? How about a flaming property? What if they've got a sword in one hand and a rose in the other? Can the player say, "Oh, no. It's not the tricked out sword I'm using, it's the rose," and avoid all of the add-ons the sword would inflict? Should they get that choice? Whose choice is it?
Favored enemy would apply to both improvised and unarmed strikes, so I don't think there's a way to justify that it wouldn't apply if you are damaging yourself.
As for weapon specialization and flaming, that would be up to the player and the GM, as it could be reasonably stated that you used a different part of the weapon, making it an improvised weapon strike, so the flaming and weapon specialization wouldn't apply. Though, with flaming, the player could also argue that they strike themself with the flaming end, so as to benefit from an ability that triggers when they take fire damage (like the Ifrit's Fire in the Blood racial trait). I see nothing wrong with a confused character using the attack on themselves to their advantage.
The confusion spell also doesn't state which hand you use, so as GM I'd probably leave it up to the player, or just default to better for them of the two. So I don't think weapon specialization or Flaming would ever apply, unless the player wanted them to.
|
I think everyone Agrees, Vicious weapon is a clear NO, you are not attacking yourself.
For Confusion:
I think there is too much thought being put into this. This should be a case of specific trumps general. General is Rangers get bonus to damage with their favored enemy. Specific is Confusion you hit yourself for 1d8+str. note 1d8+str is not the same as 1d8+damage modifiers, or weapon damage+ damage modifiers, or any other concept. It specifically calls out exactly how much damage is dealt.
Imagine a rogue being confusioned while climbing a wall. While climbing they are denied their dexterity bonus to AC, does that now mean that when they hit themselves they are doing 1d8+str+sneak attack dmg? No ofcourse not! Because the rule states you simply do 1d8+str!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's deliberately stated as plain 1d8+str to avoid all that specific interactions that could be too powerful or unpredictable. A magus holding a charge in his weapon could deliver it to himself, a rogue could sneak attack himself, if you hit yourself with a weapon with a special effect like stunning you could be affected etc.
This would be too incapacitating for what the spell is meant. That's why, even though it might not seem realistic, it only applies 1d8+str with no aditional effects.