Hey ya'll, hope you're doing great!
I love the new book, system and rules, and that here is so much info crammed into this tiny 351 paged book. But it also makes some of the descriptions rather short and open for interpretation. As for example with the two aforementioned talents.
To me, Berserk Charge, wich gives +1 Damage to attacks when you charge, seems like a shittier version of Strike Mighty Blow, which would just give +1 Damage to all attacks, including charges.
Am i reading this wrong, or are the one just plain better than the other?
Best regards
Berserk Charge and Strike Mighty Blow
This.
Plus to damage is actually much less valuable in 4E, while plus to attacks is very valuable.
There are many talents where the true value hides behind the easy-to-miss "Test:" line.
"when you Charge, you gain +1 Damage to all Melee attacks per level in this talent"
It doesn't say anything about advantage.
Now, under the lists of what gives advantage, charging is listed "Charging: charging headlong into battle grants +1 advantage".
Wether you have the talent Berserk Charge or not doesn't impact on whether you gain advantage
It doesn't say anything about advantage.
Now, under the lists of what gives advantage, charging is listed "Charging: charging headlong into battle grants +1 advantage".
Wether you have the talent Berserk Charge or not doesn't impact on whether you gain advantage
Lets clear out any and all misunderstandings once and for all.Clint wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 3:29 am "when you Charge, you gain +1 Damage to all Melee attacks per level in this talent"
It doesn't say anything about advantage.
Now, under the lists of what gives advantage, charging is listed "Charging: charging headlong into battle grants +1 advantage".
Wether you have the talent Berserk Charge or not doesn't impact on whether you gain advantage
You are absolutely correct - the advantage you gain from charging has nothing to do with the Talent.
However, the OP was asking about the general value of the Talent. It is imperative we all understand the importance of the easily-missed line "Test:" for many (but not all) Talents. This is explained in the sidebar on page 132, and yes, it is easy to miss, and no, it is not mentioned anywhere else.
In the case of the Berserk Charge Talent, we have:
So, if you have the Talent, in addition to whatever the Talent says it does, it also provides +1 SL on any Test that is successful (which makes you more likely to actually win the opposed test and/or dish out more damage).Tests: Melee on a Round when you Charge
If you pay 200 XP to take the Talent a second time, this bonus increases to +2 SL and so on. Just remember that you only gain the bonus on successful Tests. If you fail your Test by -1 SL and your opponent fails by -2 SL, you still win the opposed test (your charge hits for damage), but you don't get the SL bonus from the Talent.
Let's illustrate. Don't feel bad if you got it wrong - calculating the outcome of a combat attack is extremely complicated in 4E (compared to 1/2E, and honestly to many other fantasy rpgs as well).
Example: you have a 45% Melee skill, and two levels of Berserk Charge. You didn't have any advantage before the charge. You have a standard hand weapon of +4 with a standard Strength Bonus of 3.
You roll 49. Since you have advantage, your effective skill is 55 and you succeed. Your SL is 1 plus the 2 from the Talent's Test line = 3.
If the foe gets -1 SL on its parry/dodge, you win and deal your regular 7 plus 4 (for relative SL) plus 2 damage (because the Talent says so) = 13 (before deducting Toughness and Armour).
Yes, this means that the damage bonus is effectively twice what its description says for this particular Talent. First you get a bonus to SL (that ultimately results in more damage) from "Test:", then you get an outright damage bonus from the main description.
The point here is that the main text description of the Talent is arguably the lesser bonus!
(You deal no damage unless you win opposed tests. Bonuses to skill are (much!) more important than bonuses to damage in 4th edition.)
Last edited by CapnZapp on Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ah i can see the misunderstanding I just feel it is wrong to say that it gives an extra Succes Level, and not that it deals extra damage. While one does contribute to the other, it's not the same case the other way around. SL is never mentioned in the talent, but +1 Damage is. I know it's nit picking, but I think that's why I got confused by the arguments
Thanks for the replies people, they helped a lot!
Thanks for the replies people, they helped a lot!
It gives both. So yes, saying it gives SLs but not extra damage would indeed be wrong.
But SLs are mentioned by the talent, albeit indirectly.SL is never mentioned in the talent, but +1 Damage is.
The Talent contains a Test line. All Test lines are governed by the same rule, as explained in the sidebar in the beginning of the Talents chapter. This rule states that if a Talent contains a Test line, you gain +1 SL per level of talent for the indicated tests on success.
So the talent provides both kinds of bonuses.
Extra SLs when you succeed. Extra damage when you win (meaning when you do hit your opponent). If you both win and succeed you have gained both +1 SL and +1 dmg, which in turn translates to two points of extra damage per level of the talent.
Finally, I reread the thread. Maybe it would help to clarify that "advantage" and "extra success levels" are two completely separate things.
Last edited by CapnZapp on Mon Jan 21, 2019 10:15 am, edited 2 times in total.
Certainly that confused me to the point i had to go away and read the rules again.
Also if I could give you a medal for the post explaining this, I would.
Aha! I missed that Test description at the beginning of the talent chapter. Probably the first of many, super small but super important details I have missed!
Thanks a lot for clarifying your clarifications, and being persistent, CapnZapp! I makes sense now.
As Jadrax wrote, this is worthy commitment
Cheers
Thanks a lot for clarifying your clarifications, and being persistent, CapnZapp! I makes sense now.
As Jadrax wrote, this is worthy commitment
Cheers