How to convince GM...

[Keiger]

My GM believes that weapon "damage dice" is strictly a plural noun. However, I have been arguing that it is a collective noun. Specifically in the difference in how the feat Mythic Vital Strike stats out its damage. He believes that because "dice" is strictly plural that it cannot be a collective noun.

Are there any literary or grammatical devices that I can reference to help convince him of my interpretation?

[Archae]

being an english major i can help with this particular subject

Dice is plural, die is the singular

A collective noun is In linguistics, a collective noun is a word which refers to a collection of things taken as a whole

Damage dice itself refers to a group of dice used for damage, that would be the collective anyway.

and for what it matters mechanically mythic vital strike it refer to the number of damage dice after the base feat is applied.

of course i am having difficulty understand what is gained or lost by clarifying this mixup if you could clarify i can help further.

that said you can't really convince a gm of something, what their rule is generally final unless the gm is willing to discuss it.

[Paulicus]

Details on the debate behind the question would be helpful.

[Deighton Thrane]

The distinction is that mythic vital strike is poorly worded and states that you add all your modifiers to every damage dice you roll. So if taken as a collective noun, you would add everything twice to a greatsword vital strike. If it's not a collective noun however, you would add your modifiers 4 times, because you're rolling 4 dice when rolling for vital strike with a greatsword.

So essentially one way, with enlarge person and lead blades you can add your modifiers to damage 16 times with greater vital strike. The other way you get a 4x modifier.

[Keiger]

Archae wrote:

Damage dice itself refers to a group of dice used for damage, that would be the collective anyway.

The problem with this is that he goes on to say that there is nothing that specifically references damage dice as a collective. It is rather frustrating.

[Archae]

After looking at the exact wording of the feat it specifically says Number of weapon damage dice you roll, you would do the math using the number listed along with the vital strike you are using.

for example greater vital strike is 4X , my reasoning is you roll the set of weapon dice 4X for it. in my opinion it would refer to a more base example rather than a combination of abilities and spells, or more complicated things like the damage dice itself

So in other words whatever the vital strike lists is what the multiplier is. of course as said this feat isn't just poorly worded it is missing words and has serious grammatical issues. but from what i can work out that is my ruling for this

[GM Rednal]

Alternate Solution: Use the fixed version of Mythic Vital Strike that appears in the Mythic Hero's Handbook. Because, quite frankly, the original is broken. XD;

[Archae]

I agree with Rednal, on this one the original just doesn't work feasibly. it's to tough to decipher and the wording is complicated and unspecific

0/10 would not go mythic for it, the original i mean

[Hmm]

I just want to say that it's refreshing to see a "how to convince the GM" thread that isn't one of the following:

1) Give me the perfect argument to make the GM allow me to break Pathfinder with an over powered build.

2) Help me escape my GM's ruling that just nerfed my character and cause us all to TPK

3) Tell me how to talk with my GM about a major personality conflict

As a lover of the English language, I am so pleased that you two care enough about grammar to argue over correct usage.

Hmm

[Nox Aeterna]

Hmm wrote:

I just want to say that it's refreshing to see a "how to convince the GM" thread that isn't one of the following:

1) Give me the perfect argument to make the GM allow me to break Pathfinder with an over powered build.

2) Help me escape my GM's ruling that just nerfed my character and cause us all to TPK

3) Tell me how to talk with my GM about a major personality conflict

As a lover of the English language, I am so pleased that you two care enough about grammar to argue over correct usage.

Hmm

Weird , isnt this exactly an example of "1"?

With that being said , i can understand killing something in one hit not being considered OP in a mythic game.

[Wiggz]

Keiger wrote:

Archae wrote:

Damage dice itself refers to a group of dice used for damage, that would be the collective anyway.

The problem with this is that he goes on to say that there is nothing that specifically references damage dice as a collective. It is rather frustrating.

Then what he is telling you is that he doesn't care about how it actually works and he's going to ignore anything from logic to grammar that would disprove his personal ruling. While it would be easier if he would just say that rather than trying to justify his position, it's a GM's prerogative to rule as he likes.

Any time anyone uses the word 'dice' referring to a singular object rather than as a collective (which could in fact be a collective of one), they are using the word incorrectly.

[Paulicus]

Sounds like your best bet is to take mythic vital strike.

[Michael Talley 759]

As a GM, I can say we stand by rulings, even if silly or strange to others. However, we also have to STAND by our rulings.

So if we say your character can't do something and you see an NPC character get away with it. Well call the GM on it and explain how you have a question.

"How did the NPC do what I wanted, but when I try it, it doesn't work?"

Private or at the table work (although as a GM I'd much prefer private) as when shown in that aspect, we kind of figure out what the original design was when we didn't get it the first time. (not that many GM will admit they didn't get it)

Or it could be your feats and choices are very similar to a villain he wants to remain unique and is trying to keep you from the same aspect.