PDA

View Full Version : Blood Hunter Ghostslayer lvl 11 ability question...



samcifer
2022-02-17, 03:14 PM
Brand of Sundering adds a second die of crimson rite damage against the target of your Brand of Castigation, but can you apply the second damage die on the same hit that brands them, or only on future hits against them?

Evaar
2022-02-17, 03:31 PM
This feature is kind of a mess.

From what I'm seeing, it says some general fluff about what your Brand of Castigation is doing in a flavor sense. Then we have a sentence describing the mechanics which just says "Whenever you hit a creature with a weapon for which you have an active crimson rite, you roll an additional hemocraft die when determining the extra damage from the rite."

Note that doesn't specify you need to hit a creature you've afflicted with Brand of Castigation. It just says "whenever you hit a creature" using a weapon with Crimson Rite active. As written, this basically just doubles your Crimson Rite damage in all circumstances.

Extrapolating from the prior sentence, we can presume this was intended to apply only when Brand of Castigation is used/active on a creature. Given Brand has to be placed with a weapon attack, but requires no action, I would rule that the double damage can apply on the same hit applying the Brand. It's a 1/short rest ability, I think it's fair to make it work such that you're guaranteed to get at least 1 extra hemocraft die's worth of damage when you're using it. The creature may very well die that round, combats don't often last that long.

Lupine
2022-02-17, 08:18 PM
Alas, I am not super familiar with that class, since it’s technically homebrew.

That said, the fact that its homebrew means that you can talk with your DM ahead of time, and agree on a ruling, without changing 5e that much.

Then again, “talk to your DM” is the first line for most rules question.

If you are the DM, make a ruling that you and the player agree upon, and drive on.

ProsecutorGodot
2022-02-17, 10:00 PM
I'd say it does apply on the first hit and I'll second the idea that this feature needs some wording adjustments.