Battle Jump

[Mr. Wong Burger]

I've seen quite a bit of discussion on this feat and was wondering if I used it correctly in a previous encounter I had today.

OK, some back-story and a bit of bragging:

I'm an ECL 10 Monk/Drunken Master/Fist of Zuoken that was using an improvised Lance (I thought it'd be a good idea to snag a tree branch for this mounted campaign our DM was trying out) while riding on a flying mount. I dropped down as part of a charge to attack an Arrowhawk 20' below me. Due to expansion, a few drinks, a few feats, and my monk's belt I ended up doing 48 damage with my improvised Lance... after rolling a natural 20 on my attack :smallbiggrin:. The threat broke his armor class and this is how we broke down the damage: 48x3 for the Lance crit. 144x2 for the Lance being used during a charge.

Here's where my question about Battle Jump comes in.

Since I "...simply drop[ped] from a height of at least 5 feet above [my] opponent" did this qualify for my Battle Jump? Thereby raising my damage output to 576 for that poor bastard.

Battle Jump states that I can't be under the influence of a Fly spell or effect... but doesn't say specifically that I can't be utilizing a flying mount. I understand that if you got real technical, you could say that my character didn't fall, the mount did.

Also, now that I'm thinking about it:

If I utilize the Dismount Attack Skill Trick from a flying mount that's at least 5 feet above my opponent, would this qualify for Battle Jump's double damage? This is assuming I'm no higher than the Lance could threaten.

[Private-Prinny]

First off, extra damage doesn't stack like that. Your damage would be 48x4, or 192. I'd say this qualifies for Battle Jump, from the way you describe it, so it would deal 48x5, or 240 damage.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

I misunderstood how extra damage is applied then. I got the x3 multiplier from the crit with the lance, and you're saying that instead of multiplying each portion out, I total up the multipliers? So x3 from the crit, x2 from the charge, and x2 from the battle jump? Wouldn't that be 48x7? How did you come up with 48x5?

[senrath]

Each multiplier after the first adds their number -1. So instead of 3+2+2, it's 3+(2-1)+(2-1).

[The Rose Dragon]

I misunderstood how extra damage is applied then. I got the x3 multiplier from the crit with the lance, and you're saying that instead of multiplying each portion out, I total up the multipliers? So x3 from the crit, x2 from the charge, and x2 from the battle jump? Wouldn't that be 48x7? How did you come up with 48x5?

Think of multipliers as additions. So, a x3 multiplier adds double the original roll, while a x2 multiplier adds the original roll.

So, if the original roll is 4d8+12 (completely making this up here), a x3 multiplier adds 8d8+24, for a total of 12d8+36. A x2 multiplier adds an additional 4d8+12, for a total of 16d8+48.

Also, you don't multiply the result of the roll, you multiply the roll itself. So, you roll more dice, rather than roll once and multiply the result.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

lol, it all makes sense now. So the 48 original damage would indeed be multiplied by 3 ( for the initial crit), then I would add the original roll again (making it x2 for the Lance special) and add the roll again (for the battle jump) thereby making it 48x5. this has helped immensely.

I would still like some feedback on the dismounting attack if anyone would be so kind.

[The Rose Dragon]

lol, it all makes sense now. So the 48 original damage would indeed be multiplied by 3 ( for the initial crit), then I would add the original roll again (making it x2 for the Lance special) and add the roll again (for the battle jump) thereby making it 48x5. this has helped immensely.

Well, no. It wouldn't make it 48x5. It would, however, make you roll whatever the original damage roll was five times.

So, if you rolled 1d10+40 to come up with 48, you would roll 4d10+160 and add that to 48.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

OK, so my original damage roll was 6d8+1d4+8. With the Lance critical (x3), the Lance special (x2) and Battle Jump (x2), that would be 24d8+4d4+32? I think I did that right...

I think the fact that I'm wasted right now isn't making things easier on my brain mechanism...

Aaaaaaaand I think I finally understand The Rose Dragon's post. a x2 multiplier doesn't multiply my damage by 2, it simply adds my roll again. I've cleared up a lot about multipliers I didn't even know I had confused lol.

[The Rose Dragon]

OK, so my original damage roll was 6d8+1d4+8. With the Lance critical (x3), the Lance special (x2) and Battle Jump (x2), that would be 30d8+5d4+40?

Pretty much, yes.

[Heliomance]

Think of multipliers as additions. So, a x3 multiplier adds double the original roll, while a x2 multiplier adds the original roll.

So, if the original roll is 4d8+12 (completely making this up here), a x3 multiplier adds 8d8+24, for a total of 12d8+36. A x2 multiplier adds an additional 4d8+12, for a total of 16d8+48.

Also, you don't multiply the result of the roll, you multiply the roll itself. So, you roll more dice, rather than roll once and multiply the result.

Technically, yes. Virtually all groups run it as simply multiplying whatever you rolled for damage, though.

You are, however, entirely correct on how the multipliers stack.

[The Rose Dragon]

Technically, yes. Virtually all groups run it as simply multiplying whatever you rolled for damage, though.

You are, however, entirely correct on how the multipliers stack.

Hey, I can't speak for your house rules, I'm just saying what the book says, and how I used to play it.

[Greenish]

Technically, yes. Virtually all groups run it as simply multiplying whatever you rolled for damage, though.What, and miss out on rolling a million dice?

[BobVosh]

Ahhhh, D&D math.*


*May cause sever damage to math majors.

[Graymayre]

I would think that a flying amount would be a fly "effect" but that's is using very strict terms.

[Seatbelt]

Technically, yes. Virtually all groups run it as simply multiplying whatever you rolled for damage, though.

You are, however, entirely correct on how the multipliers stack.

Not for us. We roll the dice. :)

[Mr. Wong Burger]

So does anyone have thoughts on using the Dismount Attack skill trick from Complete Scoundrel with Battle Jump?



Complete Scoundrel pg. 86: If your mount has moved at least 10 feet in this round and you succeed on a fast dismount (Ride, PH 80), you can use a standard action to attack an adjacent opponent as if you had charged that opponent.

The scenario is, I'm using a flying mount, my mount moves to within threat of a medium sized Lance (10 feet), I dismount using Dismount Attack... I believe I just answered my own question.

The foe must be "adjacent" in order to use the Dismount Attack, and Lances don't threaten adjacent foes. Additionally, even if I could utilize the skill trick with a lance, if I dismounted above the foe, I would have to do it 5 feet above the lance's threat so that after falling said 5 feet, I could utilize Battle Jump along with still being able to attack with the lance.

Did I do this right?

**EDIT** Or, could I "hop" off of my mount whilst dismounting using the Dismounting Attack? I'm reaching here... pun intended.

[Divide by Zero]

Technically, yes. Virtually all groups run it as simply multiplying whatever you rolled for damage, though.

That's boring. It's not a real attack until you run out of dice.

[imperialspectre]

That's boring. It's not a real attack until you run out of dice.

Obligatory webcomic link here (http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=192).

[The Rose Dragon]

You think that's too many dice? I've been told that Shadowrun players are advised to buy d6s by the pound. I don't know if that's true or not, but if it is, that's a hell lot of more dice.

[arguskos]

I've rolled over 300d6 in a D&D round once.
>_>
<_<
>_>
<_<
*flees*

[Irreverent Fool]

Just for reference's sake:


Multiplying

Sometimes a rule makes you multiply a number or a die roll. As long as you’re applying a single multiplier, multiply the number normally. When two or more multipliers apply to any abstract value (such as a modifier or a die roll), however, combine them into a single multiple, with each extra multiple adding 1 less than its value to the first multiple. Thus, a double (×2) and a double (×2) applied to the same number results in a triple (×3, because 2 + 1 = 3).

When applying multipliers to real-world values (such as weight or distance), normal rules of math apply instead. A creature whose size doubles (thus multiplying its weight by 8) and then is turned to stone (which would multiply its weight by a factor of roughly 3) now weighs about 24 times normal, not 10 times normal. Similarly, a blinded creature attempting to negotiate difficult terrain would count each square as 4 squares (doubling the cost twice, for a total multiplier of ×4), rather than as 3 squares (adding 100% twice).

(That is, for x2, you normally roll one extra set of dice so for x2 again you just add one additional extra set of dice.)

We used to use a flat multiplier to whatever was rolled as well, but this made for some fairly schizophrenic criticals. At one point, someone actually came across the section about criticals and we all agreed that rolling more dice is more fun. Just remember extra dice from things like sneak attack, flaming weapon, and so on aren't multiplied as well.

If you want some real fun, pick up the maiming enchantment (Miniatures Handbook). Now your critical multiplier is instead a die roll equal to double the original multiplier (x2 becomes x1d4, x3 becomes x1d6). More dice!

obnoxious
sig

[Divide by Zero]

I've rolled over 300d6 in a D&D round once.
>_>
<_<
>_>
<_<
*flees*

inb4 War Hulking Hurler.

[arguskos]

inb4 War Hulking Hurler.
Using nothing but damage dealing spells that weren't hax. :smalltongue:

I've also played a hulking hurler. :smallyuk:

[Endarire]

I've viewed crits and damage multipliers as separate entities.

Let's assume you have a 20x3 weapon that crits. You roll damage 3 times and add STR, your weapon pluses, and so on.

Then you most of double that from Battle Jump. Weapon damage is the only variable damage that gets multiplied.

Straight damage pluses from STR (like +6 from STR), weapons bonuses (like +1), and specials like the feat Shadow Blade (+DEX bonus to damage with a Shadow Hand weapon) are multiplied.

Variables like a Flaming weapon's +d6 fire damage or a Rogue's sneak attack aren't.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

/sigh.

I guess I should edit this thread as Damage Multiplication Fun and give up on it...

I'll start a new one for my query on Battle Jump and Dismounting Attack...

[Sintanan]

I forget which book it's in, but when talking about dealing with multiple creatures on a mount it says to assume the riders are on top of the mount.
If you jumped off a huge creature (15 feet off the ground) onto a medium creature (5 feet tall) you would trigger Battle Jump, as you "fell" 10 feet on to your target. Thus, you can trigger Battle Jump from a flying mount, too. Similar concept.

At least, this is how my/our (is it proper English to use "our" in this case?) group handles Battle Jump ruling. And from a logical concept, there is no real difference between dropping 10 feet from a tree limb and dropping 10 feet from the giant's shoulder.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

That's what I was looking for! I need to do some more reading up on mounted combat, but would this also qualify for Dismount Attack skill trick? It says you can hit an "adjacent" foe on a quick dismount. Would being 10, 15, etc feet above someone consider them adjacent?

[Greenish]

That's what I was looking for! I need to do some more reading up on mounted combat, but would this also qualify for Dismount Attack skill trick? It says you can hit an "adjacent" foe on a quick dismount. Would being 10, 15, etc feet above someone consider them adjacent?Depends on your mount's size.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

So in essence; if I can threaten them from the mount, and after hopping off my mount fell at least 5 feet more than their height, I could combine the Dismount Attack skill trick with the Battle Jump feat?

[Greenish]

So in essence; if I can threaten them from the mount, and after hopping off my mount fell at least 5 feet more than their height, I could combine the Dismount Attack skill trick with the Battle Jump feat?Yes. Amusingly, as long as you're mounted, you occupy every square your mount does, but the moment you dismount this ceases to be true.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

Thanks for the help guys, this has cleared up quite a bit of confusion with regard to a build I'm considering as well.

[Sintanan]

I appologize for being unable to fully answer your question. I lack the Complete Scoundrel from my collection, so I was fully unaware of the 'dismounting attack' skill trick. I thought you were just asking about attacking while mounted and attacking after dismounting.

I really need to add the CS to my collection...

[Greenish]

I appologize for being unable to fully answer your question. I lack the Complete Scoundrel from my collection, so I was fully unaware of the 'dismounting attack' skill trick. I thought you were just asking about attacking while mounted and attacking after dismounting.

I really need to add the CS to my collection...Skill tricks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20070105a&page=5).

[Mr. Wong Burger]

I posted this before in case someone didn't have reference to the book:



Complete Scoundrel pg. 86: If your mount has moved at least 10 feet in this round and you succeed on a fast dismount (Ride, PH 80), you can use a standard action to attack an adjacent opponent as if you had charged that opponent.

I think it still coincides with your previous conclusion of whether of not a Battle Jump can be applied to the Dismount Attack.

[Runeclaw]

OK, so my original damage roll was 6d8+1d4+8. With the Lance critical (x3), the Lance special (x2) and Battle Jump (x2), that would be 24d8+4d4+32? I think I did that right...


What was the 1D4? And was the 6D8 all base weapon damage? Bonus damage dice do not multiply. Not that the extra D4s were a huge deal in this scenario.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

The Lance I used was an Improvised Weapon (made available to me due to my levels in Drunken Master as per Complete Warrior). This is where the 1d4 of initial damage came from. As per the Drunken Master class ability, I can use an improvised weapon without the penalties of not being proficient. In addition to that, the class states that the damage I do with an improvised weapon is equal to my unarmed damage +1d4.


As a level 8 Monk (my 2 levels in Fist of Zuoken stack with my 6 levels in Monk when determining my base unarmed damage) my unarmed damage is 1d10.
My Damage is increased to that of a level 12 Monk via Monk's Belt, making it 2d6.
My damage is increased by one step via Improved Natural Attack to 3d6.
My damage is increased another step via Ectoplasmic Fist shard to 4d6.
My damage was increased another step a final time via Expansion to 6d6.


Whoops... I typed d8 in my initial post, I meant to type d6.

I didn't even think about the Improvised Weapons ability (+1d4) not being base damage. I assumed that since it said that the weapons I use damage things via my unarmed damage +1d4, that it meant the weapon itself caused the extra d4, not the ability.

[Greenish]

I didn't even think about the Improvised Weapons ability (+1d4) not being base damage. I assumed that since it said that the weapons I use damage things via my unarmed damage +1d4, that it meant the weapon itself caused the extra d4, not the ability.Nah, bonus damage dice aren't multiplied. See Sneak Attack.

[Mr. Wong Burger]

I knew bonus damage wasn't multiplied, I just assumed the damage was part of my base damage for some reason. It makes sense that it's bonus now though.