Archmage & Mordenkainen's Sword

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
Thenameless
Thenameless's picture
Archmage & Mordenkainen's Sword

The Archmage from Angelfire has a Power:

Mordenkainen's Sword: Use at start of this creature's turn. The nearest enemy in line of sight takes 15 Damage.

Would the Archmage receive a damage boost from Storm Silverhand?

Use at start of round: Each Human ally and each Elf ally has +2 Attack and +5 Damage until end of round.

Thanks.

plastic finn
plastic finn's picture

No, since the Archmage does not make an attack. "... TAKES damage..."

Moraturi
Moraturi's picture

Also note that the Archmage's Mordenkainen's Sword is in the Powers section, not the Attack actions section, of the card. So no bonus there.

Thenameless
Thenameless's picture

If two Archmages were being played in the same warband, would the "duplicate powers" rule also prevent an enemy creature from taking 30 Damage in a given round from the two Archmages?

skyscraper
skyscraper's picture

As plastic finn says, the bonus does not apply to Mordenkainen's Sword.

I admit to never having found where that rule comes from, but I know that this is applied that way pretty much uniformly, that I know.

Storm's power says:

Quote:
Use at start of round. Human and Elf allies have +2 Attack and +5 Damage until end of round.

Why is the "+5 damage" only applicable to Attacks? This is where I find the rule not to be clear in the rulebook. On page 8, under the heading "bonus and penalties" it reads:

Quote:
For example, the Dwarf Battlemaster has a champion power that reads “Use when an ally hits with a M attack: +10 Damage on that attack.” When the Dwarf Battlemaster uses this power, it grants a +10 bonus to the damage of an an ally’s successful melee attack.

This specifically suggests that the bonus to damage is only applicable to attacks. However, this citation is a mere example, not a rule. And the example is not equivalent to Storm's champion power, because the Dwarf Battlemaster's power says "use when an ally hits with a M attack" whereas Storm's CP does not restrict usage to attacks in its language.

There is also the passage on page 12, under "Applying Damage", that reads:

Quote:
Bonus and Penalty Damage: Some powers and effects cause
bonus or penalty damage on a hit.If an attack affected by such an effect has no base damage when its hits, it is not increased by bonus or penalty damage. For example, the Dwarf Battlemaster can grant a +10 bonus to Damage when an ally hits with a melee attack. Even if the a ected creature’s attack does damage on a miss, only damage resulting from a hit is modified.

However, again this situation does not seem applicable to Storm's CP, because this rules passage specifically mentions that "if an attack (...) has no base damage when it hits", and the example of the Dwarf Battlemaster is again used, wherein the power specifically states "use when an ally hits with a M attack"; so where a power such as Storm's does not restrict to a hit, or to an attack, why is damage restricted to damage from an attack only? Why not also damage from auras or from powers such as Mordenkainen's Sword?

To be clear, I do not question the wisdom of not applying damage bonuses to auras and other non-attack damage for balance reasons; I'm simly questioning whether the wording of the rules support this interpretation or not. Because to me, they don't.

If I am missing any clear indication in the current rules that contradict me, I'd be glad to be corrected by anyone who can point me to the rules passage that says that only damage on an attack is inscreased from a power such as Storm's CP.

**************

Also, note that, in addition to auras and other non-attack powers, attacks that miss are also not increased by bonus damage. The rules again do not mention this, but V3 rules already incorporate this restriction in their Alpha version, and it can be found in the Collected Rulings for V2:

Quote:
Bonus damage effects only apply to attacks that hit, by default. If the effect specifically states "any time damage is dealt" or something similar, then the bonus damage will apply even on attacks that do damage on miss.

Presumably, an effect that says "any time damage is dealt", as per this last example taken from the collected rulings, would indeed mean that Mordenkainen's Sword would benefit form a thusly worded power. But Storm's CP does not state "any time damage is dealt" - even though it does not say otherwise either, according to my interpretation anyway.

All this said, I do play according to the interpretation that bonus damage only applies to attacks, and further to attacks that hit; since as mentioned above I understand that the game is balanced for this interpretation.

Tried, do you believe that the rules should and could be amended further to clarify this that bonus damage is only applied to attacks (in addition to being applied to attacks that hit)? Not auras and other non-attack powers?

skyscraper
skyscraper's picture

thenameless wrote:
If two Archmages were being played in the same warband, would the "duplicate powers" rule also prevent an enemy creature from taking 30 Damage in a given round from the two Archmages?

The duplicate powers rule would not prevent an enemy creature from taking 30 damage in a given round if there were two Mordenkainens on the battle map in the same warband. The rule reads:

Quote:
Duplicate Effects: A creature (...) can't be affected by 2 or more uses of the same power at once.

The key element here is "at once". Not "during a round".

Mordenkainen's Sword is a power that is instantaneously resolved at the start of Mordenkainen's turn. Consequently, the enemy creature is never "... affected by 2 or more uses of the same power at once". It is affected twice, at different times, namely at each of the respective turns of the two Archmages. So the enemy can indeed take 30 damage in any given round from this power.

Where the duplicate powers rule would indeed resolve in favor of the enemy creature, is in the following hypothetical situation where Mordenkainen's Sword would be worded differently:

"Mordenkainen's Hypothetical Sword: Use when an enemy activates within 5 squares of this creature. That enemy takes 15 Damage."

In the latter case, if the enemy was within 5 squares of the two Archmages when it activated, it would then be subjected to the same power twice at once, namely when it activates. But it would only take 15 damage because of the ducplicate power rule.

(Edited to remove erroneous reference to Mordenkainen the creature)

Thenameless
Thenameless's picture

Thanks skyscraper, your explanation is very clear. I also like how you elaborated into the situation where hypothetically, the duplicate effects rule would kick in.

tried
tried's picture

Only successful attacks are eligible to receive bonus damage.
The use of that example is unfortunate and is based on what was available in the original starter set. Defiant Rake was from the first 3E set.

We could just as easily substitute Storm's effect, and nothing would change.

The only time 'additional damage' is dealt is that small set of conditions when it is not bonus damage, and the power explicitly states the conditions under which it would be added.

There ARE a few powers that add on damage (Black Dragon Lurker) and these are explicitly stated.

__________________

Guildmaster Head of Organized Play

skyscraper
skyscraper's picture

Tried: do you think that V3 could clarify that bonus damage only affects Attacks, unless stated otherwise?

The rules, as they are presently worded, do not preclude bonus damage being applied to non-attack powers and effects.

Also, concerning the Black Dragon Lurker, its CP states that bonus damage is dealt on attacks and effects. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Mordenkainen's Sword is not an effect, to a similar power that would deal acid damage would not be enhanced by the Black Dragon Lurker, correct?

My understanding is that "effects" are those elements that are applied to a creature when a successful attack occurs, including but not limited to conditions and ongoing damage. However, an aura, or any other non-attack power, is not an effect. Or is it?

tried
tried's picture

PAGE 31 of the alpha rules states:

Note that only successful attacks can have extra damage; even if the affected creature’s attack would
cause damage on a missed attack, it may not be modified. Even if there is a global bonus to damage on the map due to a condition, alternate play format or power, bonus damage of any kind is never added to a missed attack.

__________________

Guildmaster Head of Organized Play

skyscraper
skyscraper's picture

This passage is strongly suggestive that this rules only applies to extra (or bonus) damage that is never applied to missed attacks, only to successful attacks. It seems silent, as are the rest of the rules, regarding non-attack powers, such as auras and Mordenkainen's Sword.

tried
tried's picture

the phrase
'only successful attacks' creates a broad limiter.
The phrase is assumed to be reaching across everything in the rulebook unless contradicted, as are all statements in the rules.

You are creating or inferring a limitation that is not present. The rules are as written.
Thus, unless you go to exception step III (the power specifically says it can interact), it doesn't.

EDIT - I want to edit my post because I think that tone is not correct.

The logic that it infers this or it desn't voer that should allow me to add damage bonuses to my movement, because it doesn't say you cannot. Or add attack bonuses to damage - or adde bonuses to each type of damage an attack causes.
The rules are also silent that I can't take seven move actions on my turn. It says I can take 1. It doesn't say I can't take seven, so I guess that means its ok? Why doesn't the bonus damage apply to ongoing damage, for example? or to healing? These are silly examples, - but a thousand similar and more compelling corner cases could be found and potentially exploited by interpreting the rules as one imagines them to be, rather than simply accepting them as absolute statements to be broadly applied. This last idea is what actually allows you to run the game, because otherwise you can really run in circles.

__________________

Guildmaster Head of Organized Play

skyscraper
skyscraper's picture

Dwayne: I do not think that I am imagining things in the rules. The examples you use further suggest that you believe that my interpretation is somehow equivalent to interpreting the rules as allowing taking seven move actions or bonus damage applying to healing (!). I do not believe that my interpretation reaches that level of ridiculous, hopefully you do not either. So either my point is unclear, or else you are being sarcastic - in the latter case it is not conducive to a pleasant conversational tone, so please avoid that.

On with the topic:

I disagree that the rule is clear as it is written in V3 Alpha because of the context of where it appears.

You rightfully argue that the sentence says "only (...) attacks". I agree. However, I could understand a reader being confused because different concepts are included in those two sentences, and the way the two sentences in the rules are written, it is the concept of "success vs miss" that is predominant:

V3 Alpha wrote:
Note that only successful attacks can have extra damage; even if the affected creature’s attack would cause damage on a missed attack, it may not be modified. Even if there is a global bonus to damage on the map due to a condition, alternate play format or power, bonus damage of any kind is never added to a missed attack.

If "[n]ote that only successful attacks can have extra damage" is clear in itself concerning the fact that "only attacks" benefit from extra damage (as you say in your post), then is the same not true about "only successful attacks" benefitting from extra damage being clear form that short sentence portion also? And then, why are there details in two sentences about "attacks that miss" not benefitting from extra damage?

I think that separating different concepts would be helpful in making this explanation clearer, by separating the topics of "only attacks" and "only successful attacks". I believe there are in fact much more non-attack powers in the game than there are attacks that miss and that the former topic would benefit form some clarification with regards to bonus damage, i.e. the bonus to damage not applying to non-attack powers, could be stated out clearly.

Suggested modified version wrote:
Only attacks can benefit from bonus damage. Non-attack powers, unless stated otherwise, do not benefit from bonus damage. Furthermore, only successful attacks can benefit from bonus damage; even if the affected creature’s attack would cause damage on a missed attack, it may not be modified by bonus damage. Even if there is a global bonus to damage on the map due to a condition, alternate play format or power, bonus damage of any kind is never added to a missed attack.

In summary, while a reader could indeed conclude that the present V3 Alpha rules passage cited above should be interpreted to not only pertain to attacks that miss, but also to "only attacks benefit from bonus damage", I'm saying that the latter does not clearly stand out, that a reasonable interpretation could be that the topic is about "successful attacks vs attacks that miss", and that the rules would benefit from clarification.

If you still disagree, there is not much more that I can argue.

FriendlyAlienist
FriendlyAlienist's picture

"Duplicate Effects: A creature (...) can't be affected by 2 or more uses of the same power at once."

...so I can't recharge two identical items from (for example) one enemy I have destroyed?

__________________

Far Realm is not as far as one would think

tried
tried's picture

Depends on the wording, but in general you can. I really can't think of a time that you couldn't, but it may exist.

__________________

Guildmaster Head of Organized Play