| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Can Mythic surge be used to turn an automatic failure (i.e. roll of 1 on a saving throw attempt) into a non-automatic failure?
My opinion is that surging is different than a bonus of +1, etc. The whole idea of surging seems to be taking a failure on a roll and with a second additional role making it into a non-failure.
Thoughts??
I tend to agree with your interpretation, BB22.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is nothing in the surge mechanics which override the auto-fail or auto-success rules, so no.
Sure, there is.
You can expend one use of mythic power to increase any d20 roll you just made[...] This can change the outcome of the roll.
I tend to agree with your interpretation, BB22.
I wish to be clear - it's not at all cut and dried.
I entirely empathize with and see where those against it would come from.
But for a mythic character, failing on a 1 with no ability to alter that is both disappointing and weird - and definitely not "mythic".
I am definitely not claiming the RAI - I can't guess what the developers were thinking. I'm not even claiming "the only RAW" - as I submit that it's up for interpretation (as is much in the English language).
Rather, I'm suggesting my interpretation which, for what it's worth, is based on both flavor and gameplay experience.
It can change the outcome from a fail to a success provided that the d20 roll is 2 or higher.
Citation needed!
(Really it's a matter of where you put the emphasis - "it can change the outcome of a roll" or the auto-fail rules.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would argue that the Champion Path ability Always a Chance would indicate that this is not possible, however I can see both sides of the argument.
While the Mythic Surge rules are in my opinion more specific than the Auto-fail rule for a nat 1, I honestly believe that the intent is not to allow this due to the aforementioned champion ability.
That ability reads more as "always on"?
It bears no mention of expending a mythic power, which is significant.
That said, I can certainly see the argument.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That ability reads more as "always on"?
It bears no mention of expending a mythic power, which is significant.
That said, I can certainly see the argument.
I would agree that it is ambiguous, and yes I see both arguments. I am simply leaning as I stated, however I do not think there is any hard RAW one way or another for this.
There is nothing in the surge mechanics which override the auto-fail or auto-success rules, so no.Sure, there is.
You can expend one use of mythic power to increase any d20 roll you just made[...] This can change the outcome of the roll.It can change the outcome from a fail to a success provided that the d20 roll is 2 or higher.
A 1 on an autofail roll is a fail irregardless of modifiers applied.
It's not a modifier. It's increasing the original roll. Hence, "increase any d20 roll." It's no longer a 1.
There is nothing in the surge mechanics which override the auto-fail or auto-success rules, so no.Sure, there is.
You can expend one use of mythic power to increase any d20 roll you just made[...] This can change the outcome of the roll.
Mmmm, I don't think so. Your BAB "increases the d20 roll" when you make an attack. Your Strength modifier does too if it's a melee attack. Nothing in-game that you add to an attack/save roll alters the nature of a natural 1.
You'd ask your player for an "attack roll", and you'd be asking for the total, modified result, not "what does the die say?" So something that "increases the roll" increases the total result, not the literal number revealed on the die.
Point is, RAW says what a natural 1 does. RAW doesn't explicitly override that in the case of a surge, so the evidence is pretty strongly in favor of it not doing so.
That said, I do get the parsing of words that is being used in defense of the idea. I just think we're looking at very slightly sloppy wording that plants the idea but doesn't support it.
You can expend one use of mythic power to increase any d20 roll you just made[...] This can change the outcome of the roll.
Mmmm, I don't think so. Your BAB "increases the d20 roll" when you make an attack.
Perhaps, but (and you may already be seeing this, but I'm posting to be clear) it's not noted as able to "change the outcome of the roll" (emphasis obviously mine) which is what the argument centers around.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mmmm, I don't think so. Your BAB "increases the d20 roll" when you make an attack. Your Strength modifier does too if it's a melee attack. Nothing in-game that you add to an attack/save roll alters the nature of a natural 1.
You'd ask your player for an "attack roll", and you'd be asking for the total, modified result, not "what does the die say?" So something that "increases the roll" increases the total result, not the literal number revealed on the die.
Point is, RAW says what a natural 1 does. RAW doesn't explicitly override that in the case of a surge, so the evidence is pretty strongly in favor of it not doing so.
That said, I do get the parsing of words that is being used in defense of the idea. I just think we're looking at very slightly sloppy wording that plants the idea but doesn't support it.
I think so. I don't see any "increase the d20 roll" verbiage anywhere around base attack bonus. It's just a number that's a bonus to a roll and is included in various forumulas. The increase language is specific to the Surge ability. That they don't treat it like a standard bonus to a roll (i.e. nothing along the lines of "spend mythic power to add 1dx to your d20 roll") tells me it's not a standard bonus. That it goes on to explicitly state it can change the outcome is a very explicit allowance that the normal result changes. That it doesn't provide an exhaustive listing of things it can change is irrelevant.
You can expend one use of mythic power to increase any d20 roll you just made[...] This can change the outcome of the roll.
Mmmm, I don't think so. Your BAB "increases the d20 roll" when you make an attack.
Perhaps, but (and you may already be seeing this, but I'm posting to be clear) it's not noted as able to "change the outcome of the roll" (emphasis obviously mine) which is what the argument centers around.
Does " able to change the outcome of a roll" guarantee success on a d20 roll. Obviously the answer is no, because your roll plus surge may still be too low. That verbiage can not be taken as an absolute statement.
Can is not will. Lets say the roll was a 2 instead of a one. Lets say a roll of 2 fails on the d20 check. You roll a surge and max out at 6, would you concede that the 8 can still be a failure on the roll in question? Than despite the verbiage the surge did not change the outcome of the roll in question. In essence, it is flavor text, not mechanics text.
No one ever said it "will" - only that it "can".
The only "absolute" statement being made (as far as the dice and verbiage is concerned, not as far as our discussion is) is "natural 1 always fails" - that's it.
Hence the "may" change the outcome conflicts with the "auto-fail" rule; if something "auto-fails" than something else (by definition) is not permitted to change the outcome - yet this is permitted to change the outcome (within the limits noted).
This is the crux of the question and cannot be casually dismissed; you see it as the "auto-fail" taking precedence; I see it as the "this is an exemption that allows for the possibility of the results to change" as taking precedence.
Both are sensible readings.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You guys' interpretation makes the later ability to re-roll entirely pretty pointless when you can supposedly add 1d6/8/10 to the die somehow.
That opens up a whole can of worms that makes no sense. "I rolled a 14" *rolls 1d8* "6! Natural 20! Auto-success!" *Vorpal weapon kills whatever you're facing*
No, stating that Surge changes the actual die result instead of teh final result is in no way a "sensible" reading.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You guys' interpretation makes the later ability to re-roll entirely pretty pointless when you can supposedly add 1d6/8/10 to the die somehow.
That opens up a whole can of worms that makes no sense. "I rolled a 14" *rolls 1d8* "6! Natural 20! Auto-success!" *Vorpal weapon kills whatever you're facing*
No, stating that Surge changes the actual die result instead of teh final result is in no way a "sensible" reading.
Not at all, I've found in my games. Re-rolling can be intensely valuable, even with the bonus in play, as, if you roll low enough, as Laz points out, you may not succeed anyway. It's really kind of a two-part deal.
Further, no one is suggesting it changes to a "natural" anything, or that the initial d20 roll ceases to be a "natural" anything - only that the ability to add to the die roll (depending on reading) allows change from "automatic" failure to potential success (however unlikely).
I'd be interested in hearing more of your can of worms, however, as that could give some insight into things.
|
You guys' interpretation makes the later ability to re-roll entirely pretty pointless when you can supposedly add 1d6/8/10 to the die somehow.
That opens up a whole can of worms that makes no sense. "I rolled a 14" *rolls 1d8* "6! Natural 20! Auto-success!" *Vorpal weapon kills whatever you're facing*
No, stating that Surge changes the actual die result instead of teh final result is in no way a "sensible" reading.
Not at all, I've found in my games. Re-rolling can be intensely valuable, even with the bonus in play, as, if you roll low enough, as Laz points out, you may not succeed anyway. It's really kind of a two-part deal.
Further, no one is suggesting it changes to a "natural" anything, or that the initial d20 roll ceases to be a "natural" anything - only that the ability to add to the die roll (depending on reading) allows change from "automatic" failure to potential success (however unlikely).
I'd be interested in hearing more of your can of worms, however, as that could give some insight into things.
If you allow it to negate auto-fail, then you need to allow it to auto-succeed. Which it does not do.
If you allow it to negate auto-fail, then you need to allow it to auto-succeed. Which it does not do.
Why? That's no where within the text, nor could it be implied.
"May change" instead of "will change" - permissive, not automatic, on the other end as well.
Effectively, either way you read it (using my interpretation), it has permission to change the results (if it succeeds at the DC), but does not automatically dictate any given result.
|
|
If you allow it to negate auto-fail, then you need to allow it to auto-succeed. Which it does not do.Why? That's no where within the text, nor could it be implied.
"May change" instead of "will change" - permissive, not automatic, on the other end as well.
Effectively, either way you read it (using my interpretation), it has permission to change the results (if it succeeds at the DC), but does not automatically dictate any given result.
We're you not just saying that the surge should be able to negate an auto-fail because it adjusts the die roll?
We're you not just saying that the surge should be able to negate an auto-fail because it adjusts the die roll?
Even if it adjusts the die-roll, we are not talking about a "natural" result of a die - only a final result.
You can expend one use of mythic power to increase any d20 roll you just made[...] This can change the outcome of the roll.
"Can" not "does" - in one interpretation ("automatic failure") the surge is incapable of changing to the die roll by definition.
This is actually the point that Laz makes: the language is not insistent that "the outcome definitively changes" only that "the outcome is permitted to change" with the clear meaning of "the outcome is permitted to change [within boundaries]" which most people take as "the outcome is permitted to change [within boundaries (of the DC)]" - a solid number of those that read it this way have "the outcome is permitted to change [within boundaries (of the DC {barring a natural 1})]" as part of the whole thing; most of us do not, because that creates an automatic conflict within the rules - either it can do something or it cannot; if it cannot than the rules are violated; if it can, than the rules are violated.
Hence, it's up to the reader to determine which of the two rules is "superior" or "wins" the conflict. Which takes precedence?
The ideas that it modifies the die roll (though this still does not make the die roll a "natural" roll for any purpose) and can modify outcomes (but doesn't always modify outcomes) means, in my mind, that anything that is less specific than the rule being used (the surge ability) that prohibits the ability from potentially being able to modify the outcome (such as an automatic success or failure) is overridden by the more specific instance of the ability itself (though there may be other equally-specific abilities or rules elements that negate this).
Hence: it can, it's permissive, and it's possible.
Not: it must, it will, and it's guaranteed.
Two very, very different things.
EDIT: Aaaaaaaaaaaand one more thing - just because something could adjust a die-roll to prevent an automatic failure does not mean that it automatically follows that this permits an automatic success, regardless of the roll itself. The basic rules are in place, but not all things create parallel results.
It either adjust the natural number or not.
It adjust the die roll. This is not natural. It is, however, not a 'bonus' as other things are generally considered.
If it does then it negates auto-miss and allows an increase for auto-hit/crit threats.
I'd say the former, but not the latter. The former is permissive, the latter is enforcement.
This is not how everyone needs to take it.
I do not think this is the case of how surges work.
I suggest it can be read as you note, but not that it must be read as you note.
I read your post and it seems as if we are agreeing, but I cannot fully tell.
I think that what you are saying is a package deal, I am not saying is a package deal. That is our disagreement. It is a disagreement on a fine point, but one that has mechanical implications, as noted above.
It's ambiguous, and has some nifty features, though it becomes massively devalued (to the thinking of several) as a relative ability if not permitted this "no-swing" ability. It's not ironclad.
Automatic Misses and Hits: A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on an attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit (see the attack action).
When you roll a d20, then roll a d6/8/10 and add the value of the d6/8/10 to the d20, what number is showing on the d20? If it's still a 1, it is an auto-failure. This is what is meant by 'natural', whether it be a natural 1 or a natural 20 - 'natural' in this context is the number actually showing on the die face.
Increasing the d20 roll you just made does not change the natural value. It does not say flip the d20 to a different number face, therefore it does not change the natural value.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Automatic Misses and Hits: A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on an attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit (see the attack action).When you roll a d20, then roll a d6/8/10 and add the value of the d6/8/10 to the d20, what number is showing on the d20? If it's still a 1, it is an auto-failure. This is what is meant by 'natural', whether it be a natural 1 or a natural 20 - 'natural' in this context is the number actually showing on the die face.
Increasing the d20 roll you just made does not change the natural value. It does not say flip the d20 to a different number face, therefore it does not change the natural value.
I would agree if it weren't for the clause about changing the result.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd be interested in hearing more of your can of worms, however, as that could give some insight into things.
Crit threat range on even a weapon that only crits on a 20 moves down to a weapon that can crit on an 8 by tier 10. Even at tier 1 it essentially makes it 14-20. 15-20 weapons can crit on a 3.
As stated before, Vorpal becomes ridiculous. When everything down to an 8 can potentially instantly kill many targets, combat becomes even more of a joke than Mythic already makes it.
It makes any ability designed around die rolls wonky, really. The die result becomes utterly meaningless. Re-roll mechanics become largely meaningless as well, and given how many of those Mythic provides, somehow I doubt it's the intent.
Reading it that way is frankly silly in the first place. There is nothing in it that suggests you're changing the result of the die, simply the result of the ROLL, which is the d20 plus any modifiers, even if that modifier is zero.
This interpretation has less of a leg to stand on than "I can act when I'm Dead".
|
|
I would agree if it weren't for the clause about changing the result.Automatic Misses and Hits: A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on an attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit (see the attack action).When you roll a d20, then roll a d6/8/10 and add the value of the d6/8/10 to the d20, what number is showing on the d20? If it's still a 1, it is an auto-failure. This is what is meant by 'natural', whether it be a natural 1 or a natural 20 - 'natural' in this context is the number actually showing on the die face.
Increasing the d20 roll you just made does not change the natural value. It does not say flip the d20 to a different number face, therefore it does not change the natural value.
But not the natural die roll of the d20.
|
|
It either adjust the natural number or not.It adjust the die roll. This is not natural. It is, however, not a 'bonus' as other things are generally considered.
If it does then it negates auto-miss and allows an increase for auto-hit/crit threats.I'd say the former, but not the latter. The former is permissive, the latter is enforcement.
This is not how everyone needs to take it.
I do not think this is the case of how surges work.I suggest it can be read as you note, but not that it must be read as you note.
I read your post and it seems as if we are agreeing, but I cannot fully tell.I think that what you are saying is a package deal, I am not saying is a package deal. That is our disagreement. It is a disagreement on a fine point, but one that has mechanical implications, as noted above.
It's ambiguous, and has some nifty features, though it becomes massively devalued (to the thinking of several) as a relative ability if not permitted this "no-swing" ability. It's not ironclad.
I am saying it would be a package deal because the words that people are hanging their hat on would need it to work that way.
It would be preposterous to think that it should work on only a natural 1 but no other number of the die.
It is used just like any other bonus and just like any other bonus it is added to the result of the d20. The big bonus of the surge is in that you use it after the result of the original roll is revealed, and thus can change the outcome of the original roll.
I'd be interested in hearing more of your can of worms, however, as that could give some insight into things.Crit threat range on even a weapon that only crits on a 20 moves down to a weapon that can crit on an 8 by tier 10. Even at tier 1 it essentially makes it 14-20. 15-20 weapons can crit on a 3.
As stated before, Vorpal becomes ridiculous. When everything down to an 8 can potentially instantly kill many targets, combat becomes even more of a joke than Mythic already makes it.
Beyond that, you are mixing both what you're saying up and what you're talking about and they are different things within the same sentence. That is exceedingly confusing for anyone who just looks at your numbers and can't follow your logic. Please explain yourself more in the future! Thanks! :D
So, to go with what you're talking about...
First the 14-20 crit applies only to the first roll, not the confirmation, and it's from tiers first to third; you only get the 15-20 "crit on a three" possibility by tenth tier, with a keen weapon (which explicitly doesn't stack with vorpal, as you can see in the link above, if that's what you're implying), by which point you can literally be gods, so far as the world is concerned.
Beyond that, you absolutely do not have a crit-threat-range as large as you are suggesting.
You have a potential crit-threat range that ranges from 1-6 greater (for 1st-3rd tiers), from 1-8 greater (for 4th-6th tiers), from 1-10 greater (7th-9th tiers), or 1-12 greater (for 10th tier); all of this "variableness" grossly increases the random factor beyond what you're implying.
What's more, if you go by this, (), that same increased threat range is actually hampered somewhat. A natural 20 is always a threat - but if you have a 16, use this ability, and anything other than a 4, well, then, it's no longer a 20 - no longer a threat.
The crit-range on weapons are clearly defined, and always stop at 20 (which is the presumed maximum for a... d20), which, again, if you follow this, means you can actually roll "too high" to score a critical hit. This makes that variable range not quite as attractive as you make it seem.
In a "perfect world" kind of scenario where you got to dictate the outcome of your surge dice, you'd be correct - as it is, this ability gives you exactly one shot at getting a 1-in-6 (or worse odds as you tier-up) at getting that natural 20 or crit threat. Also, crit-threats don't automatically succeed, so you'd have to hit the guy in the first place. (And if you're hitting them on a natural 3, they don't seem like they're that impressive.)
It makes any ability designed around die rolls wonky, really. The die result becomes utterly meaningless. Re-roll mechanics become largely meaningless as well, and given how many of those Mythic provides, somehow I doubt it's the intent.
This is false hyperbole.
The random d20 result becomes less important than for others in the face of the character's ability to modify their own fate via mythic surge, but it absolutely maintains its meaning and importance over-all.
The re-roll mechanics actually become very useful when combined with these, as this merely increases the window of opportunity to not automatically fail - that vastly increases the window of opportunity to succeed. Different effects altogether.
Reading it that way is frankly silly in the first place. There is nothing in it that suggests you're changing the result of the die, simply the result of the ROLL, which is the d20 plus any modifiers, even if that modifier is zero.
I'm glad to know that, in this conversation, instead of presenting solid argument you:
- note something untrue about the argument
- follow a logic train that doesn't hold up under its own assumptions (and isn't what was being argued)
- accuse people of being silly based on the first two
You are intelligent enough to engage in debate tactics that do not do this. PLEASE engage that way, man. I know you get very passionate about these things, but please, please, even if you disagree with someone, vehemently, treat them with some amount of respect.
As far as the can of worms that could be opened up, I've addressed the specific points you've raised. Any more? More specifics could be handy if you're willing to actually discuss them.
This interpretation has less of a leg to stand on than "I can act when I'm Dead".
And this is just akin to trolling.
You want to get into it though?
"Dead" has an actual out-of-game meaning, and the rules always go towards more-specific. It's covered.
The "I can act when I'm dead" thing has never been more than a cute discussion of rules-text that specifically avoids acknowledging that the rules utilize words that are found outside of them.
This, on the other hand, depends on what order you read the rules interacting in, and which takes precedence. This uses words found within the rules to discuss a place of potential rules conflict.
If you feel that strongly about it, however, FAQ it, and allow the PDT to agree with you on-paper. That will definitely settle any disagreements!
EDITED: into a new, less-supermassive set of two posts.
EDIT: Into a new post for slight increase in readability; sorry.
I am saying it would be a package deal because the words that people are hanging their hat on would need it to work that way.
This is really a false equivalency between two related rules that are being discussed, because one bears a striking resemblance to another. Your insistence that I must read this tangentially-related thing as the same way that I read the other thing is baffling.
I've explained: if the ability is permissive instead of secondary or automatic, than it no longer needs the symmetry with "automatic" anything.
It would be preposterous to think that it should work on only a natural 1 but no other number of the die.
No, it wouldn't. You seem to have a strong sense of parallelism that demands that it does, but there is nothing preposterous about it not doing so.
The point is, since "automatic" failure would prevent the ability from altering the outcome once known, and the ability grants itself the explicit ability to alter the outcome once known, the two pieces of rules conflict: which one takes precedence? I choose to read it as the surge, as that makes sense within the RAW, and it also makes it a useful ability that has the potential to help players feel really mythic instead of suffer exclusively from a 5% failure chance.
It is used just like any other bonus and just like any other bonus it is added to the result of the d20.
You are definitely within your rights to read the English that way. It makes sense from a certain perspective.
I, on the other hand, do not read it that way and am outlining the reasons for why.
The big bonus of the surge is in that you use it after the result of the original roll is revealed, and thus can change the outcome of the original roll.
This is a pretty decent argument. It could be said that this is what makes it mythic.
The problem is that there are plenty of other ways to get a very similar effect, and the 'ability' isn't that impressive in light of those options.
That said, my main point of reading it the way I do is to make my mythic players feel mythic.
"Arg, I rolled a 1!" never feels very mythic. Having a small chance to negate that is pretty cool.
No, but see the champion ability which makes nat 1s not auto fail.
This is, as noted to Covenant, also a pretty good argument. The fact that you never have to expend a resource on that ability makes them different enough that I find both valuable in their own way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would agree if it weren't for the clause about changing the result.But not the natural die roll of the d20.
What are failures and successes? Results. Surge may change the result. If it can't modify a failure, then it can't change results. It's no different than if you don't roll sufficiently high to meet a DC. A 1 on certain rolls is simply a shortcut to a failure condition. That's it. It's not special in any other way. In comes surge, which, as I said and cited, can explicitly change this result.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are failures and successes? Results. Surge may change the result. If it can't modify a failure, then it can't change results. It's no different than if you don't roll sufficiently high to meet a DC. A 1 on certain rolls is simply a shortcut to a failure condition. That's it. It's not special in any other way. In comes surge, which, as I said and cited, can explicitly change this result.I would agree if it weren't for the clause about changing the result.But not the natural die roll of the d20.
Can Gallant Inspiration or Timely Inspiration (and there are probably a couple of other spells of like nature) negate a natural 1 auto failure? These spells have very similar wording about changing the result. Yet in both cases neither says anything about changing the natural roll.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so, if we roll a 20 and add the surge (for whatever reason), is it no longer an auto-hit (or threat since it is no longer a "natural 20")?
-Doomn
Both of those are explicitly "bonuses" which have defined parameters; they contain similar, but different wording.
Okay, so, if we roll a 20 and add the surge (for whatever reason), is it no longer an auto-hit (or threat since it is no longer a "natural 20")?
-Doomn
Why would you?
Either the auto-success kicks in (in which case you don't need the bonus), or you're rolling something other than an attack or save (in which case the "auto-success" rule doesn't apply).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Both of those are explicitly "bonuses" which have defined parameters; they contain similar, but different wording.
Okay, so, if we roll a 20 and add the surge (for whatever reason), is it no longer an auto-hit (or threat since it is no longer a "natural 20")?
-Doomn
Why would you?
Either the auto-success kicks in (in which case you don't need the bonus), or you're rolling something other than an attack or save (in which case the "auto-success" rule doesn't apply).
Why would you add a surge to a roll when you already know the outcome (it's a "auto failure)?
Alternately, you roll a 19 to hit (a miss but in the threat range of you weapon). If you add the surge, is it no longer a threat (total of 25 but no longer in the 19-20 threat range)?
-Doomn
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's you who really needs to define what you're talking about, man, because if my post doesn't make any sense to you then obviouly you're not talking about the same thing I am.
By my reading, you are suggesting the Surge changes the effective number that appears on the die.
In which case, everything I said is true (I never said Vorpal could activate on a 15-20 weapon threat BTW, which is why it would activate on an 8 instead of a 3).
However, you seem to be going by some odd interpretation I can't even begin to understand.
The bonus is a bonus when it's a 20, but not a bonus when it's not a 20? Either it's a bonus or it's not a bonus. If it's not a bonus, anything after 20 is "wasted", because bumping it to a 20 makes everything autosucceed. Or, even odder, it makes things somehow "unsucceed" (I rolled a 15 to threat, but not sure if that hits! Surge, oh no! the result is 21 I no longer crit! My god given powers have betrayed me!)
I'm telling you this interpretation doesn't have a leg to stand on because it uses a fundamentally different mechanic (in your mind) than every single other ability in the game, but nowhere does it say or even suggest that is the case.
There are even a few abilities in-game where the player can choose the result of the die (the Cyclops' Inspiration thingy and the helmet that grants such, and the Weapon Adept's "choose my own Initiative roll" power). These are explicitly specified as changing the result of the DIE, not the result of the roll.
I just really don't see where this is coming from.
More to the point, I just don't see why anybody would want it to BE the case. If you've ever played Mythic you know: Attack rolls ad saving throws don't really need any more of a boost. Surge as it is makes things pretty certain what the outcome i going to be (If you use a Surge, and fail, you shouldn't have been in that situation to begin with).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can Gallant Inspiration or Timely Inspiration (and there are probably a couple of other spells of like nature) negate a natural 1 auto failure? These spells have very similar wording about changing the result. Yet in both cases neither says anything about changing the natural roll.
Both of those are bonuses added to a roll. As worded, surge is not a bonus to the roll. It increases the roll itself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Both of those are explicitly "bonuses" which have defined parameters; they contain similar, but different wording.
Okay, so, if we roll a 20 and add the surge (for whatever reason), is it no longer an auto-hit (or threat since it is no longer a "natural 20")?
-Doomn
Why would you?
Either the auto-success kicks in (in which case you don't need the bonus), or you're rolling something other than an attack or save (in which case the "auto-success" rule doesn't apply).
Why would you add a surge to a roll when you already know the outcome (it's a "auto failure)?
Because the ability is explicitly allowed to change the outcome after-the-fact. In other words, you'd use the surge because you wanted a different outcome.
Alternately, you roll a 19 to hit (a miss but in the threat range of you weapon). If you add the surge, is it no longer a threat (total of 25 but no longer in the 19-20 threat range)?
-Doomn
If you'd read my post (and understood it in all its long, long, wordiness) this is actually my objection to Rynjin's own impression of the ruling I make (i.e. the "problem with crits" he mentions).
Effectively, I have never said that it makes anything automatic, one way or the other (though it could be read and ruled that way), but rather that it is a permissive ("can change") which, being the more specific rule (and not being a "bonus" of any kind) overrides the automatic element.
However, even accepting the logic on its own face value, there is (almost)* never a reason to add a surge to a natural 20 (under the "automatic success" rule; i.e. attacks and saves)*, meaning that, if a player wants to expend a surge to make something a non-automatic success for some reason... okay? It's really not an unbalancing factor in that regard and still allows the sense of "I can bend fate because of my awesome" which is what a mythic surge is.
* Barring extremely unusual story/character-based circumstances.
Again, I am not claiming you should read it in the same way I (or the OP) do - merely that reading it within that light falls under the purview of both RAW and fluff-reasoning.
So far, the elements that have been put forth that are unbalancing are not as unbalancing as they've been presented, and the two solid arguments for the other interpretation (of which bbangerter's falls into the same category as Trekkie90909's and Covenant's) is not persuasive enough to get me to agree that the interpretation I go with is against "RAW" or even it's weight - I certainly see where the arguments are coming from, and appreciate them for what they are, but I disagree with the ultimate conclusion.
That said, I don't believe they are "wrong" either - I simply believe that there is more than one "correct" here.
However, you seem to be going by some odd interpretation I can't even begin to understand.
I just really don't see where this is coming from.
Given time, perhaps, we both can communicate effectively!
(Heaven knows, I try, but don't always succeed...) :D
I think it's you who really needs to define what you're talking about, man, because if my post doesn't make any sense to you then obviouly you're not talking about the same thing I am.
I have. I agree we're not communicating. That happens, alas - people, amirite?
I'll try to clarify within my responses to you below.
By my reading, you are suggesting the Surge changes the effective number that appears on the die.
Yes. But this is different from "natural" which surge is not.
In which case, everything I said is true (I never said Vorpal could activate on a 15-20 weapon threat BTW, which is why it would activate on an 8 instead of a 3).
I see - the clumping of the arguments together made that a bit unclear, so I'm sorry for misunderstanding.
Still, here's the problem: you assert that it does, however, outside of relatively rare circumstance, from my experience, it does not.
The bonus is a bonus when it's a 20, but not a bonus when it's not a 20? Either it's a bonus or it's not a bonus. If it's not a bonus, anything after 20 is "wasted", because bumping it to a 20 makes everything autosucceed. Or, even odder, it makes things somehow "unsucceed" (I rolled a 15 to threat, but not sure if that hits! Surge, oh no! the result is 21 I no longer crit! My god given powers have betrayed me!)
Actually, this is exactly what I was talking about.
There is a difference in the nature of a "natural" 20 and 20 - in this case, it would not be "natural".
Look at it this way: normally the random variable value for an ability is {score}+<1-20>; on a "1" of the random variable outcome (the d20) it's an automatic failure. In this instance, the random variable value is, instead, {score}+<2-26> (or <2-28, 2-30, or 2-32, based on tier>; not only is there no longer a natural 1 to be, you're not even rolling a d20 - you're rolling a "d20-cum-d6" with the ability to alter the fate of the person rolling.
I'm telling you this interpretation doesn't have a leg to stand on because it uses a fundamentally different mechanic (in your mind) than every single other ability in the game, but nowhere does it say or even suggest that is the case.
It can, but not the way you're reading or thinking about it.
There are even a few abilities in-game where the player can choose the result of the die (the Cyclops' Inspiration thingy and the helmet that grants such, and the Weapon Adept's "choose my own Initiative roll" power). These are explicitly specified as changing the result of the DIE, not the result of the roll.
Hmmmm... let's look!
Cyclops Helm - HOLY CRAP what an amazing item! I must own this for all characters I play from now on...
Outside of that, I can't find anything else player-worthy with the cyclops' stuff ().
Cyclops itself doesn't have any relevance to PCs (unless you're running a really unusual game, in which case, House Rules should apply anyway), while the weapon adept has exactly nothing to do with this, because initiative doesn't fall under the auto-success rule, hence doesn't apply (and also, it specifies in that ability "from 1-20" making it impossible to choose your surge roll, unless you want it to cap out at 20, but there's no reason to use the surge, given you already can choose 1-20).
With the Cyclops Helm being so very, very under-priced (seriously HOLY CRAP) there is still literally no reason to use your Surge ability, because you just choose to nat-20 it, and then the whole thing doesn't matter at all, as you've just automatically succeeded (presuming an attack or a save).
Plus, while I'd allow it (and, in fact, read it that way), under many folks' (understandable) interpretations, it wouldn't be allowed, as it doesn't reference the mythic surge ability (but, as I said, I'd read it favorably).
At most, what you've done is allow a player to purchase a badly under-priced item (NO SERIOUSLY, THAT THING IS AMAZING) to either "definitely hit-or-save" or "confirm critical that came up naturally anyway", once per day.
More to the point, I just don't see why anybody would want it to BE the case. If you've ever played Mythic you know: Attack rolls ad saving throws don't really need any more of a boost. Surge as it is makes things pretty certain what the outcome i going to be (If you use a Surge, and fail, you shouldn't have been in that situation to begin with).
Well, you're wrong on this one, at least - at least not the way I've played mythic. In many instances, things can be quite anticlimactic without this rule in place.
One supposes it is heavily defined by play-style in this case. I don't find it, and have not found it to be broken at all. Instead, it works with Paizo's own design philosophy of "not-very-optimized -> a good gaming experience anyway" which I think is pretty neat.
ALL OF THAT SAID, LET ME BE CLEAR: YOU ARE NOT WRONG TO INTERPRET IT THE WAY YOU DO.
I just don't think I am either. I believe there is an argument that it functions well enough, and, in my experience, it does.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Both of those are explicitly "bonuses" which have defined parameters; they contain similar, but different wording.
Okay, so, if we roll a 20 and add the surge (for whatever reason), is it no longer an auto-hit (or threat since it is no longer a "natural 20")?
-Doomn
Why would you?
Either the auto-success kicks in (in which case you don't need the bonus), or you're rolling something other than an attack or save (in which case the "auto-success" rule doesn't apply).
Why would you add a surge to a roll when you already know the outcome (it's a "auto failure)?Because the ability is explicitly allowed to change the outcome after-the-fact. In other words, you'd use the surge because you wanted a different outcome.
Alternately, you roll a 19 to hit (a miss but in the threat range of you weapon). If you add the surge, is it no longer a threat (total of 25 but no longer in the 19-20 threat range)?
-Doomn
If you'd read my post (and understood it in all its long, long, wordiness) this is actually my objection to Rynjin's own impression of the ruling I make (i.e. the "problem with crits" he mentions).
Effectively, I have never said that it makes anything automatic, one way or the other (though it could be read and ruled that way), but rather that it is a permissive ("can change") which, being the more specific rule (and not being a "bonus" of any kind) overrides the automatic element.
However, even accepting the logic on its own face value, there is (almost)* never a reason to add a surge to a natural 20 (under the "automatic success" rule; i.e. attacks and saves)*, meaning that, if a player wants to expend a surge to make something a non-automatic success for some reason... okay? It's really not an unbalancing factor in that regard and still allows the sense of "I can bend fate because of my awesome"...
I had not read your post (I started writing after the first few posts but got side-tracked and finished up later - after several other posts were made - I think I'm getting old...).
I forgot the part in surge that allowed you to add after the result was known. My bad.
My personal opinion (and how I would rule in my games) is it should change the result and may make it a success (if the final result would succeed) – it is a mythic ability, after all. Mythic abilities are designed to bend and reshape reality, how should/would negating an “auto-failure” be any different.
Using another alternate system, if a Hero Point can be used to reroll a result (or even two to cheat death), then a mythic point (surge) should be able to alter an “auto-fail.”
Just my two coppers…
-Doomn
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd be wary of people trying to optimize using that interpretation.
Lucky Surge (feat) roll twice and take higher (optional)
Potent Surge (feat) add 1 to surge result
Legendary item (ability) - legendary surge (bonded) use your die+1 step
-- powerful surge (add 2 to surge result) -- needs to be major artifact
Marshal
-- focus (ability) roll twice take highest (all the time)
-- greater surge (ability) treat surge as three tiers higher. At tier 10, gain 2d8
I omit maximize surge as it is 1/day.
With 3 abilities and 2 feats,
You get (tier + 3) surge die that you roll at least twice or optional 4 times, taking the highest. You add 1 to the result. You could then, optionally, have your item surge as well, adding (step above (tier + 3)) die.
This can be done at tier 3, giving you 1d8+1 roll 2/4 times, take highest, with optional +1d10 (maybe rolled twice if it's intelligent?)
At tier 6, you could make the item a major artifact.
At that point, you would get
1d10+1 rolled 2/4 times + optional 1d12+2 (maybe roll twice)
It's not necessarily a bad thing to do it the way you suggest, I'd just be sure to keep an eye out for people really trying to game the system.
The above is certainly not automatic, and would require 1-2 MP -- so not all the time -- but it does give the player a fair shot of turning low rolls into crits with a 15-20 threat range weapon at a potentially higher rate than a GM would be comfortable with. YMMV.
Note that abilities could be omitted to reduce the statistic standard deviation, lowering the result but making it less random.
All of that is very true, sir. Excellent points all-round. :)
EDIT:
I had not read your post (I started writing after the first few posts but got side-tracked and finished up later - after several other posts were made - I think I'm getting old...).
Happens to me all-the-daggum-time, sir. All-the-daggum-time. :D
Otherwise: cool, cool. :D
|
|
Can Gallant Inspiration or Timely Inspiration (and there are probably a couple of other spells of like nature) negate a natural 1 auto failure? These spells have very similar wording about changing the result. Yet in both cases neither says anything about changing the natural roll.Both of those are bonuses added to a roll. As worded, surge is not a bonus to the roll. It increases the roll itself.
Incorrect.
It modifies the result of the roll. Not the roll itself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the question stems from the idea that the natural value of the die is also referred to as it's result...
So one group reads it as:
natural result = whatever appears on the die + surge
final result = natural result + bonuses/penalties.
The other group reads:
natural result = whatever appears on the die
final result = natural result + bonuses/penalties + surge.
The fact that English can be interpreted many ways is one of its most potentially wonderful qualities, though it can be frustrating when approaching a question of rules.
-- I'd also point out that Force of Will renders the auto-fail question pretty much moot at 7th Tier, as rolling 1d20 for a mythic point is better in almost all regards to spending a mythic point to surge out of auto-fail (Marshal abilities make this fuzzy, and legendary item ability stacked onto the Marshal abilities might make the surge edge it out... but that's significant expense to make surge a great thing)