RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
As a full-round action, an enemy can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace to a helpless foe. An enemy can also use a bow or crossbow, provided he is adjacent to the target. The attacker automatically hits and scores a critical hit. (A rogue also gets her sneak attack damage bonus against a helpless foe when delivering a coup de grace.) If the defender survives, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die.
Now that it's been stated fully, here's a question: Can you deliver a coup de grace with a touch (or ranged touch) spell? My gut instinct says yes. However, this is one of those sticky situations where the rules don't specifically say you can but it also doesn't say you can't. I know Sebastian will love this one.
It seems logical to me that, since a touch spell can crit, it is capable of the precision necessary to deliver a proper coup de grace. However, from a game balance standpoint, a coup de grace's save DC is determined by damage dealt (which is automatically maxed). A coup de grace with a spear is dealing 24 damage, which means a DC 34 Fort save. If that weren't tough enough, imagine a shocking grasp dealing 60 damage (5d6 maxed x 2) and needing a DC 70 Fort save to survive! Granted, a coup de grace should be hard to survive (that's the point, after all), but this would be pretty much impossible.
Thoughts?
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I would allow the spell to function, but where does the maxed damage come from?
*jaw hangs open* ...I... I could've sworn I saw that somewhere...
*goes to scour the SRD*
EDIT: Hmm. Nevermind then. It just states that it is automatically critical. I have no idea where I got the max damage thing from...
|
As a full-round action, an enemy can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace to a helpless foe. An enemy can also use a bow or crossbow, provided he is adjacent to the target. The attacker automatically hits and scores a critical hit. (A rogue also gets her sneak attack damage bonus against a helpless foe when delivering a coup de grace.) If the defender survives, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die.
Personally, since it specifically says either "melee weapon" or "bow or crossbow" that you should stick with that. I would say that the randomness of magic makes it pretty much impossible to coup de grace with a spell effectively.
Well, if a creature survives a 75hp coup-de-grace, I would imagine that it has a pretty good save as well. That said, it probably doesn't have a +75 bonus on its saves either. So, maybe there's that 1 in 20 chance (a natural twenty) to survive the ordeal... We're talking about striking someone in the eye with all your might at point blank range. Ouch!
And, yes I would leave the coup-de-grace for any attack that has a 'to-hit' roll.
Ultradan
|
|
I'm kind of surprised that people are so quick to allow this to be used for coup de grace attacks. There are many damage dealing spells that are powerful enough since they only require a touch/ranged touch attack to hit that allowing automatic double damage seems to me to be a recipe for a lot of trouble. Would your player's scream "foul" if you did a hold person followed up by an automatic crit of orb of acid? At 7th level dealing 14d6 damage (average 49 points of damage) and topping out at 15th level dealing 30d6 damage (average 105 points of damage). What weapon -- even adding a 15th level rogue's sneak attack damage -- can do (on average) 105 hit points of damage on a critical hit?
If you allow this, just be aware of the potential for abuse.
My two coppers...
|
I'm kind of surprised that people are so quick to allow this to be used for coup de grace attacks. There are many damage dealing spells that are powerful enough since they only require a touch/ranged touch attack to hit that allowing automatic double damage seems to me to be a recipe for a lot of trouble. Would your player's scream "foul" if you did a hold person followed up by an automatic crit of orb of acid? At 7th level dealing 14d6 damage (average 49 points of damage) and topping out at 15th level dealing 30d6 damage (average 105 points of damage). What weapon -- even adding a 15th level rogue's sneak attack damage -- can do (on average) 105 hit points of damage on a critical hit?
If you allow this, just be aware of the potential for abuse.
My two coppers...
I agree 100%.
FH
Okay, I'm curious...
/What/ abuse? Coup de grace can only be used against a helpless foe, which leaves that to the realm of the following conditions:
They're unconscious (and likely dying) in which case they're probably going to die from the damage anyway.
They're paralyzed, which means they're probably out of the fight anyway except in the possible circumstance you had something with a high save bonus suffer a rare failure against a Hold spell.
And if you fail a save versus a Hold spell while adjacent to a wizard, you better pray he doesn't have disintegrate ready to follow up with.
My point is that situations where someone finds themselves the subject to a Coup De Grace aren't the sort of situations one should be worried about the potential 'abuse' of allowing spells to qualify for a coup de grace. Such are typically the times when the enemy is pretty much defeated anyway, and it's not terribly often that a spellcaster is going to be adjacent to their foe.
And IMO, it's a much sweeter victory when you can blast such a foe into the ether, rather than simply having to hack them into bits.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Okay, I'm curious...
/What/ abuse?
I'll be the Devil's Advocate here and state that a 5th level sorcerer could easily possess the spells ghoul touch and scorching ray. A failed Fortitude save at touch range lines you up for hopeless annihilation in the following round at the hands of 8d6 fire damage.
Still, I'm glad I've got some people thinking here. I can see that, at the higher levels, allowing spells to coup de grace could certainly amplify the threat they pose to most characters (since becoming helpless tends to happen fairly often against most spellcasters). I'm enjoying the discussion and I'm still not 100% convinced that they should or should not be allowed to coup de grace yet. Carry on.
|
|
My point is that situations where someone finds themselves the subject to a Coup De Grace aren't the sort of situations one should be worried about the potential 'abuse' of allowing spells to qualify for a coup de grace. Such are typically the times when the enemy is pretty much defeated anyway, and it's not terribly often that a spellcaster is going to be adjacent to their foe.
Can you coup de grace a stunned character?
I understand what you are saying.
My question is mostly -- Would the players be ok with it happening to them? If they do survive the damage, they most likely won't be surviving the save.
While it might be fun for the PCs to obliterate their opponents, I don't usually take great joy in obliterating the PCs. And I do feel that "what's good for the goose..."
EDIT: And I guess that it's the automatic critical that I have a problem with. I just feel that there are a number of spells that were never written thinking that it would be possible to have an automatic critical.
|
|
I'm kind of surprised that people are so quick to allow this to be used for coup de grace attacks. There are many damage dealing spells that are powerful enough since they only require a touch/ranged touch attack to hit that allowing automatic double damage seems to me to be a recipe for a lot of trouble. Would your player's scream "foul" if you did a hold person followed up by an automatic crit of orb of acid? At 7th level dealing 14d6 damage (average 49 points of damage) and topping out at 15th level dealing 30d6 damage (average 105 points of damage). What weapon -- even adding a 15th level rogue's sneak attack damage -- can do (on average) 105 hit points of damage on a critical hit?
If you allow this, just be aware of the potential for abuse.
My two coppers...
I agree 100%.
FH
Actually, I changed my mind. As long as the creature is adjacent to the target of the coup de grace, I have no problem with using spells that do hit point damage to do the deed.
The problems that I do have is using a ranged touch from a distance (which is what I interpretted (most likely falsely)as the intent of this post), and with other damage being multiplied (like ability damage, and odd stuff like the different conditions(fatigue, stunned, etc)).Sorry for the confusion.
FH
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
@ Moff: No, you cannot coup de grace a stunned characer. They must be helpless in order to be coup de grace'd (I'm pretty sure that's not actually a word).
@ FH: No, heh, it was not my intent to ask if spells can deliver a coup de grace at range. I meant that, if all the normal restrictions were met, could you use a spell in place of a weapon? You can't coup de grace with a bow from 30 feet away, I would not allow someone to do it with a scorching ray either. Sorry for the confusion.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
What can a stunned character do? I would have thought that they were helpless.
Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).
They can't act, but it does not state that they are actually helpless. Presumably, a stunned creature wobbles back and forth on it's feet as if highly intoxicated, which makes lining up a killing shot somewhat difficult, but doesn't allow them any 'active' defense (hence the denial of Dex to AC).
Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks gets no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.
@ Moff: No, you cannot coup de grace a stunned characer. They must be helpless in order to be coup de grace'd (I'm pretty sure that's not actually a word).What can a stunned character do? I would have thought that they were helpless.
Stunned = Lose Dex bonus to AC, -2 AC, can take no actions, drop items in hand. So not quite helpless, but just about.
I'd say take each spell by itself to determine if you can coup de grace. If it's something that can be directly aimed (ray for example), then yes. If it's indirect (wall of fire, fireball, etc) then no. Rays you can aim at vital organs (eyes if nothing else), while the others just kind of happen.
That looks like it makes no sense. No sleep ftw (damn you Harry Potter).
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I'd say take each spell by itself to determine if you can coup de grace. If it's something that can be directly aimed (ray for example), then yes. If it's indirect (wall of fire, fireball, etc) then no. Rays you can aim at vital organs (eyes if nothing else), while the others just kind of happen.
Yeah, it goes without saying that you couldn't coup de grace with a spell that did not require an attack roll. Coup de grace'ing (I love finding new ways to horrifically mangle this word) with magic missile or flamestrike wouldn't make much sense.
|
|
What can a stunned character do? I would have thought that they were helpless.Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).They can't act, but it does not state that they are actually helpless. Presumably, a stunned creature wobbles back and forth on it's feet as if highly intoxicated, which makes lining up a killing shot somewhat difficult, but doesn't allow them any 'active' defense (hence the denial of Dex to AC).
Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks gets no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.
Between "Our Lady" and "The Almighty" I understand the "rules" but it seems silly to me that the most you can do is stand there and drool isn't considered "helpless".
Ok, back to the regularly scheduled debate...
Between the full round action (a necessary component) and being adjacent to the creature in question and that stunning is not included, it probably won't make that much difference in the long run. I still don't think that I would allow it. I just think that someone will find a loophole that will "break it" and it just seems easier to say "no" ahead of time.
I'd probably allow the coup de grace with a touch spell. Sure, the damage will be doubled. Sure, the Fort save will be astronomical. But if I'm blowing a spell to make sure I kill you, then I can only inflict a limited number of massive overkill coups de grace per day (sorry Fatespinner, starting to mangle the word like you). On the other hand, if you let the bloodthirsty rogue do the job, or the fighter with Power Attack and a greatsword, your opponent is likely to be just as dead, and you didn't blow a spell doing it. Mind you, a spell that permits repeated use is still going to be effective, but anything that discharges after one use is being wasted by the caster who decided that it was cool to blow someone's head off with an orb of fire spell. That's a spell slot that might be needed later against the Chief Evil Bad Guy (trademarked). The wizard might just as well load their crossbow and shoot the guy, unless he's got an awesome Fort save a heavy crossbow will probably kill him anyway and only cost one bolt.
Contributor
|
We have always allowed this. This is our troll-killer; beat them into unconciousness and then deliver a coup-de-grace with a wand of inflict X wounds.
I have traditionally only allowed it for actual touch attack spells, (which are effectively weapons in hand) not for ranged touch attacks. i might let a player get away with a ranged touch spell from an adjacent square, since crossbows apparently work.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
...or the fighter with Power Attack and a greatsword, your opponent is likely to be just as dead...
Since a coup de grace does not actually require an attack roll, you would not be able to use Power Attack on it. On one hand, it's a little silly ("He's not moving. I whomp on him with everything I've got!") but, on the other hand, a coup de grace is supposed to be something that is highly precise which Power Attack, by definition, is not. I agree on the rogue thing, however, as Sneak Attack most certainly does apply.
You could always rule that Power Attack works normally, however, and eliminate the arguement. It isn't expressly mentioned either way but, since the feat requires an attack roll penalty to function and a coup de grace does not require an attack roll, I wouldn't let it fly in my games. Your mileage may vary.
I don't see the capacity for abuse here. I'm with the others, if the evil wizard wants to burn a spell to off a helpless party member then fine. The PC gets a more memorable death than a crossbow bolt in the eye socketand thats one less ray the wizard will shoot at the rest of us.
Plus if you think your players will whine when they get lazered for a DC-68 fort save, imagine how annoying they'd get when you explain to them that they put beam of fire capeable of melting through steele right through a bad guys face and he's still kicking.
Tell 'em, Sexi. If an evil wizard puts his hand firmly on top of your head and releases 10,000 volts (or 10d6 hp) of electricity into your skull, the save to survive should be astronomical. Of course, this is coming from the DM who, in normal (non-AP) game play makes characters fatigued and/or exhausted when they get wounded enough. Combat with lethal weapons and spells should be deadly!
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
You guys are mean.You know, meteor swarm allows an attack roll....
Man, can you imagine an Archmage with the Mastery of Shaping High Arcana creating a 'safe spot' for himself and just letting loose with a horrendous tide of meteoric doom on some poor held bastard?
DM: "He commits a coup de grace... with meteor swarm."
Player 2: "Man, dude, this guy really hates you!"
Player 1: "Suckage. What's the damage?"
DM: "96. Make a DC 106 Fort save or die."
Player 1: *crumbles up character sheet and tosses it into the wastebasket*
Player 2: "Dude! We could have raised you!"
Player 1: "No way, man. Not even my soul is left after that."
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Does it really matter? The fort save on a coup de grace is pretty hard to make to begin with and usually only giants/high fort save types have a chance once you get past low levels. Is there really a difference between a DC 30 Fort save and a DC 4,545,900,000 Fort save when you have a +4 Fort Save?
If the mage wants to get that close to a fallen foe and use a spell (or a charge from a spell) to coup de gras, I don't see a problem with that. Yeah, they are more effective than with a weapon, but they also pay a higher cost for that effectiveness (i.e., expending a spell or expending a charge from a spell). A rogue can sneak attack till he's blue in the face and that smart fighter in the party who carries a light pick for these situations can be effective with the tactic on a consistent basis.
|
You could always rule that Power Attack works normally, however, and eliminate the arguement. It isn't expressly mentioned either way but, since the feat requires an attack roll penalty to function and a coup de grace does not require an attack roll, I wouldn't let it fly in my games. Your mileage may vary.
I allow it, because the penalty still applies to any AoO before the next round, and because having a helpless opponent shouldn't force you to reduce your damage.
So does a ballista.You guys are mean.You know, meteor swarm allows an attack roll....
" I sneak attack Sven with a ballista!"
Query: why waste a spell on a coup de grace when you can step on their neck?
unarmed coup-de-grace---(1d3+strength bonus) X2=dead?; fort save DC save= 10 +?
correct me if I'm wrong but that doesn't look like an autokill
maybe unrealistic but i believe this is the RAW
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Yay! My post came back.?
They cuttin' you off again?
If I had a nickel for every time I have received an email from Cosmo saying "Dear Sebastian, you are a constant nuisance on the boards. As a result, your posts will be deleted at random until you take the hint and go away."
Director of Sales
|
If I had a nickel for every time I have received an email from Cosmo saying "Dear Sebastian, you are a constant nuisance on the boards. As a result, your posts will be deleted at random until you take the hint and go away."Yay! My post came back.?
They cuttin' you off again?
Awww... c'mon... I just love hearing your screams of frustration! I can hear the echoes all the way up here in Bellevue.
Besides, your posts always come back... eventually... don't they?
:D
|
Sorry to interrupt with a grammar / usage note, but it WAS asked for.
Regarding "correct" past tense usage: Coup de grace is a noun. Now, while most words in English, even SAE, allow for differentiation in part of speach, coup de grace is still French and not SAE. It can ONLY be used correctly as a noun. Thus there is no correct past tense usage for coup de grace.
One could say, "the BBEG broke out da WHOOP ARSE and "performed" a coup de gracey on dat sunovabich wit a Sphere of Annihilation!" But not "couped de grace" or "coup de graced."
-W. E. Ray
Sorry to interrupt with a grammar / usage note, but it WAS asked for.
Regarding "correct" past tense usage: Coup de grace is a noun. Now, while most words in English, even SAE, allow for differentiation in part of speach, coup de grace is still French and not SAE. It can ONLY be used correctly as a noun. Thus there is no correct past tense usage for coup de grace.
One could say, "the BBEG broke out da WHOOP ARSE and "performed" a coup de gracey on dat sunovabich wit a Sphere of Annihilation!" But not "couped de grace" or "coup de graced."
-W. E. Ray
i agree but I'm still wondering if anyone has a more realistic yet game balanced rule for'stepping on the neck' of a helpless enemy---maybe Torn Asunder:critical hits by bastion press has the answer I seek...
i agree but I'm still wondering if anyone has a more realistic yet game balanced rule for'stepping on the neck' of a helpless enemy---maybe Torn Asunder:critical hits by bastion press has the answer I seek...Sorry to interrupt with a grammar / usage note, but it WAS asked for.
Regarding "correct" past tense usage: Coup de grace is a noun. Now, while most words in English, even SAE, allow for differentiation in part of speach, coup de grace is still French and not SAE. It can ONLY be used correctly as a noun. Thus there is no correct past tense usage for coup de grace.
One could say, "the BBEG broke out da WHOOP ARSE and "performed" a coup de gracey on dat sunovabich wit a Sphere of Annihilation!" But not "couped de grace" or "coup de graced."
-W. E. Ray
...anyone read it?
I think the rules are realistic enough; consider this: snapping a neck of some guy from the street is rather easy 1d3+1-1/2 Strx2; consider 10 DMG, which would kill any commoner Lvl 1 to 3 already but the Fort DC 20 is really hard to beat, in reality if you are some kind of rushed (you only have 6 seconds for aiming and stepping), you will not succeed to kill someone every time you tried (I hope you don't ;-)). Of course an adventurer is stronger and more skilled in such things, but normaly his opponent is tougher, I guess an Ogre has a really big and strong neck, although it will hurt him, but maybe not kill him. So it is not as unrealistic as you might think, IMHO.
About touch spells, it would look really cool for the evil Wizard to extend his hand to the held rogue's face and suck him dry with vampiric touch, or make him convulse until he drops by shocking grasp. The only point which could be a problem: casting a spell is a standard action (normally), but coup de grace needs a full-round action...although casting the touch spell includes the actual attack, casting the spell would still make you wait until the next round to CdG, and if the wizard wants to waste one round, if he could just use his staff instead...I don't know.
I'll be the Devil's Advocate here and state that a 5th level sorcerer could easily possess the spells ghoul touch and scorching ray. A failed Fortitude save at touch range lines you up for hopeless annihilation in the following round at the hands of 8d6 fire damage.
Sure, but I still don't see this as likely to be a problem. Mages tend (though I'll note that I've some few concepts where this tendency is ignored) to stay out of touch range, so the guy most likely to eat this sort of annihilation is the enemy that decided it was a good idea to get up close and personal with the mage. Normally, this is a sound tactic since it makes it harder for them to cast spells, and a tank can chew pretty quickly through a mage's HP. IMO, turnabout's fair play, so when that mage busts out the paralyzation and the flaming death, I'd let it buy him some safety from melee confrontation for a while.
My question is mostly -- Would the players be ok with it happening to them? If they do survive the damage, they most likely won't be surviving the save.
While it might be fun for the PCs to obliterate their opponents, I don't usually take great joy in obliterating the PCs. And I do feel that "what's good for the goose..."
EDIT: And I guess that it's the automatic critical that I have a problem with. I just feel that there are a number of spells that were never written thinking that it would be possible to have an automatic critical.
PC death isn't something I think of many players as being "Ok" with anyway. When I DM, all I can do is try to make sure their deaths are meaningful or at least memorable. Being annihilated by the BBEG via disintegrate coup de grace strikes me as memorable "Dude, /how/ much damage?" :) And sure, I can buy that there are spells written without much thought to them getting an auto crit. But I'd argue, again, that those spells would make for a rather memorable end.
And again, these situations are likely rare, which makes them all the more memorable when they /do/ happen.
The only point which could be a problem: casting a spell is a standard action (normally), but coup de grace needs a full-round action...although casting the touch spell includes the actual attack, casting the spell would still make you wait until the next round to CdG, and if the wizard wants to waste one round, if he could just use his staff instead...I don't know.
I'd just allow the spell to be cast as a part of the full round action, and here's why: With the exception of touch spells (which can be held), spells occur the instant they're cast. So taking a standard action to cast the spell and then a full round action to coup de grace just doesn't jive with the way spellcasting works.
|
|
Sorry to interrupt with a grammar / usage note, but it WAS asked for.
Regarding "correct" past tense usage: Coup de grace is a noun. Now, while most words in English, even SAE, allow for differentiation in part of speach, coup de grace is still French and not SAE. It can ONLY be used correctly as a noun. Thus there is no correct past tense usage for coup de grace.
One could say, "the BBEG broke out da WHOOP ARSE and "performed" a coup de gracey on dat sunovabich wit a Sphere of Annihilation!" But not "couped de grace" or "coup de graced."
-W. E. Ray
Coup de grace, like reconnaissance, is SAE, whatever its provenance*. (You'll find it in most English dictionaries.) But I agree that English, whether SAE or another dialect, does not normally allow for the verbing** of multi-word nouns. (E.g., "*He sergeanted at arms for the student assembly.")
* So to say.
** As they say, verbing weirds nouns. This is particularly so in cases like this.