Desna's Shooting Star and Conductive Starknife

[graystone]

willuwontu wrote:

And regardless I have shown that the feat itself makes strikes (or successful hits) against the target if the attack roll succeeds.

No you haven't... You've proven 'effective strikes' and have brought 0% proof that 'effective strikes' adds multiple flaming damage.

"extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit" Desna has you make "make a single attack": Why do you count strikes 'hits' and discount the part of the feat that actually talks about hits? "the attack hits"...

Single attack, single hit, multiple damage rolls: Fire only activates on that single hit the feat [and flaming] tells you that you make.

[willuwontu]

Yes the feat talks about the hit of the single attack roll you make for it. It then goes on to tell you how many strikes you get from that hit. (note that this is also the same feat that uses inspire competence as an example of a damage bonus).

wrote:

Advanced Benefit: You can impart a powerful spin to a thrown starknife so that multiple blades strike the target rather than just a single blade of the four, dealing extra damage with the other blades. As a full-round action, you can make a single attack with a thrown starknife, rolling 1d4 to determine how many effective strikes you gain with the attack (if you roll a 1, then only one blade strikes). If the attack hits, all of the effective strikes damage the target. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack damage) and critical hit damage only once for this attack. The damage bonus from your appropriate ability score modifier applies to each strike, as do other damage bonuses, such as a bard’s inspire competence bonus. Damage reduction and resistances apply separately to each strike.

Now we look at what a strike is

combat wrote:

An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target’s Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.

A successful hit results in a strike that deals damage to the target, therefore a strike that deals damage to the target is a successful hit.

Flaming says

Flaming wrote:

a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire that deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit.

Therefore since you make strikes that deal damage (or successful hits), you deal the damage from flaming. Flaming does not care whether these are effective hits, just whether they are successful.

In order for the flaming damage to not be added to the strikes, a strike that is applying damage to a target needs to be proven to not hit, or effective hits need to be proven different from normal hits and not hit their target.

Edit: Edited for more clarity

[graystone]

willuwontu: Desna's states you make a SINGLE attack and multiple damage rolls... You can keep going round and round but it's STILL A SINGLE ATTACK... If the damage rolls were actual strikes then they could crit, have sneak attack added [and add flaming] each 'effective strike'.

Unless and until you can PROVE that "make a single attack" and "If the attack hits" somehow means multiple attacks, then I have nothing else to say to you: I disagree and think you are 100% wrong as flaming only adds damage once per attack.

PS: site acting funny, ate 1/2 of post... :(

EDIT: I think you rely on strike meaning hit/attack but look at Magic Missile once: "A missile of magical energy darts forth from your fingertip and strikes its target, dealing 1d4+1 points of force damage." A strike without a hit/attack. So we're in a squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares scenario. Even if you can prove 100% that attacks are strikes, that in no way proves strikes must be attacks or hits. You can't sneak attack with a magic missile, but with strike = hit it would be possible.

[Talonhawke]

Which means ergo that manyshot only rolls once can't crit or sneak attack on the therefore can't add flaming.

But you want to work mental gymnastics to say that since it's a second arrow it works differently but it follows the same rules you are trying to use to exclude the extra damage from Desna's. that extra arrow isn't getting a successful attack its using the same single attack if the attack hits logic.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Multiple projectiles means multiple sources of Flaming when fired from a projectile weapon with that property.

You're trying to say that a singular Starknife gets the benefits of being multiple projectiles, which is just flat-out false.

[Jurassic Pratt]

Put me in the camp that "effective strikes" = "effective hits".

Not sure either camp can prove their position 100% here.

[Talonhawke]

No I'm saying that weapon's enchantment is on if it's been activated and in no way is listed in the exclusions for Desna's or many-shot. But the logic you are applying still doesn't muster for many-shot either.

If single attack means single +1d6 fire then a single attack means single +1d6 fire.

In fact all your interpretation does is push the Desna's user to change from a flaming/shocking/any dice bonus to the best options for increased static/other effects with no real downside simple because you reading imply's only static bonuses for one of two identical abilities.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Jurassic Pratt wrote:

Put me in the camp that "effective strikes" = "effective hits".

Not sure either camp can prove their position 100% here.

To expand on your equation with basic Algebra math.

Effective Strikes = Effective Hits.

Subtract "Effective" from both sides, and you have Strikes = Hits. This is not being debated.

The argument on the other side is "Effective Strikes" = "Hits". While the above equation proves that Strikes and Hits are the same, unless you can prove that "Effective" has a value of zero (AKA has no bearing on the comparison), that equation can't be definitively proven.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Talonhawke wrote:

No I'm saying that weapon's enchantment is on if it's been activated and in no way is listed in the exclusions for Desna's or many-shot. But the logic you are applying still doesn't muster for many-shot either.

If single attack means single +1d6 fire then a single attack means single +1d6 fire.

In fact all your interpretation does is push the Desna's user to change from a flaming/shocking/any dice bonus to the best options for increased static/other effects with no real downside simple because you reading imply's only static bonuses for one of two identical abilities.

Uhh, yes it does.

How many objects are you throwing with the Divine Fighting Technique? One.

How many projectiles are you firing with Manyshot? Two.

As I've stated before, the reason Manyshot works is because it fires multiple projectiles with the property, which creates multiple sources of the damage taking place, whereas the Divine Fighting Technique doesn't, creating only one source of the damage effect.

[Talonhawke]

I'm firing 2 shots the both use the same roll and would be stopped by deflect arrows thus its 1 hit with one attack roll with the second projectile being just as much a hit or strike as the 1d4 roll for Desna's.

[Talonhawke]

Jurassic Pratt wrote:

Put me in the camp that "effective strikes" = "effective hits".

Not sure either camp can prove their position 100% here.

No we really can't short of dev insight or new text in a new supplement this will be up in the air.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Being stopped by Deflect Arrows identically doesn't mean their mechanics are identical. It's basically a non sequitur.

[ShroudedInLight]

I think it's easier to chalk this up the multistot vs desna debate to "bows are better than thrown weapons" and leave it at that.