Critical Hit Question

[RTGoodman]

I didn't want to derail another thread, so I thought I'd ask here. First, two quotes:

When you make an attack roll and get a natural 20 ... you have scored a threat. The hit might be a critical hit (or 'crit'). To find out if it is a critical hit, you immediately make a critical roll - another attack roll with all the same modifiers as the attack roll you just made.

True Strike
[...]
You gain temporary, intuitive insight into the immediate future during your next attack. Your next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus. Additionally, you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to attackers trying to strike a concealed target.

Alright, so true strike says that it gives you a bonus on your next single attack roll. The rules for a crit confirmation (as defined in the Rules Compendium) say that you use all the same modifiers as the attack roll.

So, which do you do? Does the +20 from true strike count as a modifier that you'd also count on your crit confirmation roll? Or does the text of true strike talking about your "next single attack roll" over rule this?

[Talic]

I didn't want to derail another thread, so I thought I'd ask here. First, two quotes:






Alright, so true strike says that it gives you a bonus on your next single attack roll. The rules for a crit confirmation (as defined in the Rules Compendium) say that you use all the same modifiers as the attack roll.

So, which do you do? Does the +20 from true strike count as a modifier that you'd also count on your crit confirmation roll? Or does the text of true strike talking about your "next single attack roll" over rule this?

Critical Hit rules provide all same modifiers. Modifiers are bonuses and penalties which affect the roll. True Strike would apply.

However, something like the expending of a surge of fortune, which gives you an auto-nat 20 on a single roll, is not a modifier, but a special effect. Such things would not apply to the confirmation roll.

[tyckspoon]

I think that the specific text of true strike that says 'single attack roll' overrules the general case that crit confirmations use the same modifiers as the scoring hit. The confirmation roll is a second, new attack roll, so true strike has already been expended and cannot apply. Now, speaking from a common-sense perspective, I find that silly; it's a new attack roll, but it's the same swing of the weapon, which is the reason it uses the same set of modifiers. There's no reason your magically-guided potential critical shouldn't be magically-guided into a confirmed critical aside from possible ramifications on game balance.

[Swordguy]

true strike[/I] says that it gives you a bonus on your next single attack roll. The rules for a crit confirmation (as defined in the Rules Compendium) say that you use all the same modifiers as the attack roll.

There's your answer, right there. The True Strike spell provides IIRC, an "Insight Bonus" [i.e., a modifier] to the attack roll. Ergot, it applies as well to the crit confirmation.

[Skjaldbakka]

Really, what about cleave?

If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature. You can use this ability once per round.

[tyckspoon]

I think Cleave's intent was another attack at the same Base Attack Bonus with all relevant modifiers recalculated. You wouldn't get to use a flanking bonus on a Cleave target that you didn't flank, or apply a Favored Enemy bonus if you were a Ranger cleaving from a favored to a non-favored enemy; those modifiers apply to a crit confirmation because you're 'attacking' the same enemy, but a Cleave is an entirely new attack and not just an attack roll.

[Skjaldbakka]

Favored enemy is damage, not to hit. I don't use True Strike for Cleave. I do use True Strike for crit confirms. I was simply pointing out the natural extension of Swordguy's argument.

[Talic]

Really, what about cleave?

Cleave isn't specific about keeping all modifiers. Just the attack bonus. Thus, no.

[Skjaldbakka]

Seems pretty specific to me. At The Same Bonus. No room for doubt there. RAW is pretty clear, if you interpret it as Swordguy does.

I don't. (although I agree with his conclusion, I disagree with his argument)

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Seems pretty specific to me. At The Same Bonus. No room for doubt there. RAW is pretty clear, if you interpret it as Swordguy does.

I don't. (although I agree with his conclusion, I disagree with his argument)

Just to be sure I have not misunderstood you:

Do you allow True Strike to apply to the confirmation rule on the basis of RAW or a house rule?

If RAW, could you please explain which text supports such a use?

Thank you.

[Talic]

Seems pretty specific to me. At The Same Bonus. No room for doubt there. RAW is pretty clear, if you interpret it as Swordguy does.

I don't. (although I agree with his conclusion, I disagree with his argument)

At the same bonus != with all the same modifiers.

For example:

you have cleave, and you've got 1 standing opponent and one prone opponent. You power attack the standing opponent with a total attack bonus of +9, and hit, dealing enough damage to fell him. You declare the prone opponent to be the target of the cleave attack.

You then apply an additional +4 MODIFIER to your bonus for attacking a prone target.

or if you have cleave, and you fell an opponent with your spiked chain, and for your cleave, you declare a disarm attack on another adjacent foe.

You then apply an additional +2 MODIFIER to your bonus for using a spiked chain to disarm.

Modifier is not equal to bonus. You're getting confused between bonuses, and bonus. When an attack is referring to a single bonus, and one only, as cleave does, it is referring to the base attack bonus. Not the +2 insight bonus, the +4 circumstance bonus, the +3 strength bonus, and the +1 inherent bonus. JUST the Base Attack Bonus. You then apply any applicable MODIFIERS to that roll, just as you would for any other attack.

This isn't rocket surgery. The text is there for people using the full attack action. It doesn't enable you to reuse spells or ignore standard situational modifiers to an attack, such as prone, bonuses to certain kinds of attacks (like trip and disarm), or concealment bonuses.

[AstralFire]

Seems pretty specific to me. At The Same Bonus. No room for doubt there. RAW is pretty clear, if you interpret it as Swordguy does.

I don't. (although I agree with his conclusion, I disagree with his argument)

At the same bonus appears to be referring to Iterative Attack Bonus.

[Skjaldbakka]

Just to be sure I have not misunderstood you:

Do you allow True Strike to apply to the confirmation rule on the basis of RAW or a house rule?

If RAW, could you please explain which text supports such a use?

Thank you.

As a house rule, base on my perception of RAI.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

As a house rule, base on my perception of RAI.

That is how I understood it, just wanted to be sure my conflict shyness was not trying to get me out of an argument.

[Roderick_BR]

Just to be sure I have not misunderstood you:

Do you allow True Strike to apply to the confirmation rule on the basis of RAW or a house rule?

If RAW, could you please explain which text supports such a use?

Thank you.

By RAW, yes, you apply. All modifiers, it's right there. You simply redo the same attack to see if you confirm the threat. Same bonuses and penalties. If you use power attack (Without shock trooper, let's say), you still get the penalty to confirm the critical. Special conditions (like Power Critical) specify when something changes.

[brian c]

This isn't rocket surgery.

I believe this raises an obvious question: what is rocket surgery? And why doesn't my college have it as a major?

In response to this issue though, I believe that the wording of critical confirmations does allow for the True Strike bonus to apply, but the wording of Cleave does not allow for that bonus to apply on the extra attack.

And for the benefit of the Popcorn Tyrant: I do not consider this a houserule, I consider this the interpretation of the RAW. Honestly, I would houserule that True Strike should not affect the roll to confirm.

[Duke of URL]

I say the true strike bonus applies to critical confirmation both in the RAW and RAI.

True Strike:

Your next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus.

Critical Hit:

To find out if it’s a critical hit, you immediately make a critical roll—another attack roll with all the same modifiers as the attack roll you just made.

Therefore, since true strike provides an insight bonus to the attack roll, the same bonus applies to the critical threat conformation roll. So, the RAW say yes, it applies.

As far as does it make sense? (I.e., the RAI) Yes -- true strike makes your attack roll more precise, allowing for more potential damage.