Vorpal VERSUS Fortification

[Sqrlmonger]

Can someone explain how this works?

It was my understanding that with 135% fortification against a CR 25 creature you had effectively 110% fortification.

Additionally, I took it to be the case that having greater than 100% fortification I was immune to vorpal attacks.

Is this not the case? If not, why not? And would my DW clicky have saved me?

[Zirun]

Fortification only protects against crits (and only the physical damage, not things like burst effects) and sneak attacks. Death Ward and Deathblock prevent instant death effects like Vorpal.

[Matuse]

Vorpal and fortification have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

[Derailment]

Vorpal and fortification have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

In DDO, yes.

In PnP, I would rule other way (Beheading is mere physical effect, its not death spell causing it, but sword; and Vorpal always occurring on crit and need crit confirmation, which Fortification would cancel as well).

[Sqrlmonger]

Fortification only protects against crits (and only the physical damage, not things like burst effects) and sneak attacks. Death Ward and Deathblock prevent instant death effects like Vorpal.

Thanks for the info, will keep it in mind going forward.

Though, I do still find it bizarre that fortification can't prevent it. Thematically it seems like exactly what fortification is there for, stopping nasty crits.

Oh well, as long as I can work around it I'm happy.

[Rhomnibus]

Vorpal and fortification have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

As I understand it, critical hits and vorpal strikes are two different things. So 100%+ fortification blocks crits but not vorpal strikes. So e.g. it will stop Flaming Burst but not Fiery Detonation.

I think it follows that fortification does not affect the confirmation roll (the second d20 roll to confirm critical threat = critical hit), or else it would block vorpal effects, most or all of which require a confirmed crit.

[WielderofGigantus]

As I understand it, critical hits and vorpal strikes are two different things. So 100%+ fortification blocks crits but not vorpal strikes. So e.g. it will stop Flaming Burst but not Fiery Detonation.

I think it follows that fortification does not affect the confirmation roll (the second d20 roll to confirm critical threat = critical hit), or else it would block vorpal effects, most or all of which require a confirmed crit.

No, that doesn't sound right. I've gotten Icy Burst damage on monsters like constructs who have 100% fort. The crit effects still work even at 100% fort, it's just that the x2 or x3 base damage doesn't work.

[GeoffWatson]

The OP is how it works in PnP D&D. Fortification protects against Vorpal, and Death Ward doesn't.

Geoff.

[Derailment]

The OP is how it works in PnP D&D. Fortification protects against Vorpal, and Death Ward doesn't.

Geoff.

It's how PnP could work if DM allow it, because by rules nothing stops Vorpal at all.

[bartharok]

Fortification will block critical hits, not any effects that are triggered by a critical hit. In other words it wil do nothing against vorpal effects, since they have bothing to do with an actual critical hit. It will not help against bursts or anything like that either, since it will only prevent the critical multiplier from activating

[Vua]

In DDO, yes.

In PnP, I would rule other way (Beheading is mere physical effect, its not death spell causing it, but sword; and Vorpal always occurring on crit and need crit confirmation, which Fortification would cancel as well).

It's not a physical effect, it's a magicical death effect. It occurs only on a 20, not on a crit. If it was strictly physical you'd roll for a beheading with any sword rolling a 20.

[Rhomnibus]

"Fret not sire, 'tis but a mere physical effect."

[oweieie]

It's not a physical effect, it's a magicical death effect. It occurs only on a 20, not on a crit. If it was strictly physical you'd roll for a beheading with any sword rolling a 20.

Most people would probably interpret it to not be a magical death effect anymore than dropping a conjured rock on someone's head is. However it isn't explicit and the combat system is abstracted enough that there is room for GMs to interpret it that way.

The OP is how it works in PnP D&D. Fortification protects against Vorpal, and Death Ward doesn't.

In PnP fortification just makes damage from crits be rolled normally and stops sneak attack damage, it does nothing about stopping other effects from crits. The rules for vorpal even talk about vampires and golems, both of which are immune to critical hits, so it's pretty clear fortification does nothing wrt vorpal in PnP.

In DDO deathward/deathblock works as does having undead traits. In PnP nothing works. But in PnP by the time you're facing vorpals you're also facing partys and enemies that have the ability to wish their entire party back to life, have contingent spells to save them or gate in titans. Abstracting it down to "deathward works" is fine for a game that can't handle all that complexity.

[Vua]

Most people would probably interpret it to not be a magical death effect anymore than dropping a conjured rock on someone's head is. However it isn't explicit and the combat system is abstracted enough that there is room for GMs to interpret it that way.



In PnP fortification just makes damage from crits be rolled normally and stops sneak attack damage, it does nothing about stopping other effects from crits. The rules for vorpal even talk about vampires and golems, both of which are immune to critical hits, so it's pretty clear fortification does nothing wrt vorpal in PnP.

In DDO deathward/deathblock works as does having undead traits. In PnP nothing works. But in PnP by the time you're facing vorpals you're also facing partys and enemies that have the ability to wish their entire party back to life, have contingent spells to save them or gate in titans. Abstracting it down to "deathward works" is fine for a game that can't handle all that complexity.

Some people think dinosaurs and cavemen were alive at the same time. I can't help that. Cut off my character's head with a +5 longsword and I'll agree with most people. Until then it's an effect granted by a magic weapon and shouldn't be prevented by fortification.

[ferrite]

Well here is the rule.

SRD, "Upon a roll of natural 20 (followed by a successful roll to confirm the critical hit), the weapon severs the opponent’s head (if it has one) from its body."

DDO's interpretation, "On an attack roll of a natural 20 which is also confirmed as a critical hit, and if the enemy has 1000 or fewer HP, the enemy's "head is cut off".

They generally appear the same, except for the added 1000 HP rule for DDO, which has no impact on this scenario.

There are two interpretations here, the first is realizing the attack roll, and damage roll, are two separate things. Notice how both descriptions say you must only roll a 20 on the attack roll, and must confirm the roll to crit. It says nothing about you must cause damage, or bypass an enemies' fortification to be successful on the vorpal strike--it says only that you must meet the criteria of confirming the crit, regardless of any defenses. And as far as defenses go, any defense would have to specifically prevent a vorpal strike, and fortification does not list that it does this; it only prevents additional damage from a would-be crit.

The second interpretation is that if fortification would have prevented a critical, then no critical occured at all, hence there was no vorpal. I can understand this reasoning as well, however the way the rule is worded, and the way fortification is worded, this would mean the hundred or so other special effects that depend 'on crit' would also be rendered useless. Under this scenario, with sufficient fortification you could prevent nearly every effect in the game that depends on a crit or natural 20.

Seeing as how this path would make fortification abilties quite powerful, I think its clear why the devs chose the first path where fortification only prevents additional damage.

[Sqrlmonger]

Well here is the rule.

SRD, "Upon a roll of natural 20 (followed by a successful roll to confirm the critical hit), the weapon severs the opponent’s head (if it has one) from its body."

DDO's interpretation, "On an attack roll of a natural 20 which is also confirmed as a critical hit, and if the enemy has 1000 or fewer HP, the enemy's "head is cut off".

They generally appear the same, except for the added 1000 HP rule for DDO, which has no impact on this scenario.

There are two interpretations here, the first is realizing the attack roll, and damage roll, are two separate things. Notice how both descriptions say you must only roll a 20 on the attack roll, and must confirm the roll to crit. It says nothing about you must cause damage, or bypass an enemies' fortification to be successful on the vorpal strike--it says only that you must meet the criteria of confirming the crit, regardless of any defenses. And as far as defenses go, any defense would have to specifically prevent a vorpal strike, and fortification does not list that it does this; it only prevents additional damage from a would-be crit.

The second interpretation is that if fortification would have prevented a critical, then no critical occured at all, hence there was no vorpal. I can understand this reasoning as well, however the way the rule is worded, and the way fortification is worded, this would mean the hundred or so other special effects that depend 'on crit' would also be rendered useless. Under this scenario, with sufficient fortification you could prevent nearly every effect in the game that depends on a crit or natural 20.

Seeing as how this path would make fortification abilties quite powerful, I think its clear why the devs chose the first path where fortification only prevents additional damage.

I was actually aware of the wording of vorpal when I wrote my original post. My interpretation, wrong or not, is that the fortification check (if successful) precludes the confirmation roll and thus fails to meet BOTH the PNP SRD and especially fails to meet the "which is also confirmed as a critical hit" portion of the DDO rules.

I'm perfectly fine working within the system as it is (not that I have a choice), but I'm skeptical that the implementation is correct or at the very least that the dev interpretation of the rule is correct if it is indeed intended. Either way everyone in my PNP game agrees wholeheartedly that it should block it so we will play it that way. DDO has it this way and I can live with that too, even though I feel it is a poor implementation.

[Funny_looking_mole]

A quick google search shows that there is debate on whether it should protect or not, generally those opposing it point out that vorpal specifically mentions it can work on things immune to critical hit (Undead, constructs, Ooze {though it points out that even though it works on Ooze since they have no head it has no effect}) whereas those for fortification blocking it tend to focus on mobs saying they are immune to crits, whereas fortification says it negates crits. Either way there is no official ruling either way, and so DDO's implementation is just as correct as any other.

[oweieie]

whereas fortification says it negates crits.

Vorpal doesn't require the crit to deal crit damage, just for a threat from a 20 to be confirmed. Fortification doesn't stop confirmation. They went out of their way to say that precise strike is stopped by fortification, and they went out of their way to say that things immune to being critted can still be vorpaled.

[ferrite]

DDO has it this way and I can live with that too, even though I feel it is a poor implementation.

I can agree with this in some ways, however its probably quite the challenge to take a pen and paper game and translate it into an MMO. Maybe this is just one of those things that has to be modified to get it to work correctly, otherwise it creates a serious imbalance.

I can suggest that, the higher you increase your AC, the better protected you are against vorpal, even with the new nonsensical PRR rules in play. Reason is, you can't prevent a 20 from being rolled on you, but since vorpal must make a confirmation roll as well in order to take effect, you can increase your AC as high as you can get it to make that additional roll fail to confirm.

There might be some new ED abilities as well that can help as well, but I can't think of any off the top of my head. Even so, a high AC would probably the best defense against it.

[kierg10]

also, why does deathblock and deathward stop assassinate?

Assassinate is not magical at all, it is merely the rogue stabbing you in the heart.

If a barbarian walks up and adrenaline one shots you that isn't a death effect, but that barb would still be chopping your head off, or destroying some other important body part.

On the vorpal thing, it is like being FOD'd or PK'd........so magical effect lol