Author Topic: Consolidated Customer Service Answers  (Read 5259 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tsuyoshikentsu

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 468
    • For My Mother: An Internet Serial
    • Email
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #20 on: June 23, 2008, 04:10:43 AM »
Oh, actually.  If you assume that Charles (the rep) meant "power" instead of "ability," then there's no contradiction -- he's saying it works, as long as all requirements of the power are met.
Anyway, this cake is great!  It's so delicious and moist.

Stalk me on Twitter!  Validate my existence!  Maybe Even Get An Optimization Tip!

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #21 on: June 23, 2008, 11:53:44 AM »
I got a response about keywords:

Quote
Discussion Thread
 Response (Support Agent)   06/22/2008 02:00 PM
Daniel,

Damage does not grant a keyword. There are many powers that do a specific type of damage but the power does not have that keyword and does not count has having it for the purposes of any other powers, feats, etc.

Psychic damage normally has the Psychic keyword. The powers listed in that article do not.

No, it does not.

Good Gaming!

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Joe
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 9am-6pm PST / 12pm-9pm EST


 Customer (Daniel Thorpe)   06/22/2008 01:18 PM
I have heard a lot of ideas running around about how keywords work and retroactively gaining keywords based on damage. I simply wanted to clarify a few questions.

*Does a damage type automatically grant the keyword of that type?

*Is psychic damage covered under the "Illusion" keyword. (Referencing the "Class Acts: Wizard" article)

*Does the feat, Psychic Lock apply to powers with the Illusion keyword?

********************
Page Number: 55, 205
Book Name: Player's Handbook

There you have it!  Cust serv contradicts itself...  Although, it seems like the other response is trimmed a bit...
« Last Edit: June 23, 2008, 11:55:31 AM by Dan2 »

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #22 on: June 23, 2008, 03:37:03 PM »
What I have posted was their entire response to me.  I trimmed nothing.

Dan, why don't you try pointing out the text on page 55 so you're sure the person is actually looking at the relevant rules?  CustServe seems to do a very poor job of actually *reading* the rules.  (Seriously, I asked a question about bolstering blood, and their response had nothing to do with the text, so when I followed up with a quote of the rules text they said (paraphrased) "well yes, but that's not how its intended to work, and there will be errata.  Thanks for pointing this out".)  CustServe seems to be living in this weird The Rules Are How We Say They Work world that isn't connected especially strongly to the rules as they are written, so you have to remind them of what the rules actually say every now and again to get answers based on the rules.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2008, 03:40:14 PM by Squirrelloid »
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #23 on: June 23, 2008, 04:25:27 PM »
I'm quite surprised!  Usually their answers tend to be longer than that.

I did direct him to page 55 in the text box that they ask for relevant page number in...

I have no reason to suspect that he did not review the text on that page.

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #24 on: June 23, 2008, 05:23:03 PM »
I'm quite surprised!  Usually their answers tend to be longer than that.

I did direct him to page 55 in the text box that they ask for relevant page number in...

I have no reason to suspect that he did not review the text on that page.

My bolstering blood question also cited the relevant page.  The text on bolstering blood is far shorter, and yet the initial response I got had little to do with the text.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2008, 08:50:38 PM »
I'll put the followup questions and responses to the question here for your perusal.

Quote from: Daniel
What powers (aside from the article) have damage types that aren't reflected in the power keywords?

I would like to think that psychic damage would fit under the Illusion keyword but the illusion keyword is an "effect" keyword.

pg 55 of the PHB lists damage keywords and effect keywords.
Psychic is a damage keyword whereas Illusion is an effect keyword.

For reference, here is the text regarding the two types of keywords.
"Damage Type: Many powers create energy or a substance
that deals damage to their targets."

"Effect Type: Some powers are classified according to
how their effects work."

Can effect keywords provide damage?

Are damage keywords necessitated in a power's description?

Was the lack of a damage keyword just an oversight in the making of that article?

Finally, having reviewed this again, would adding a damage type automatically grant a keyword of that type?

Thank you so much for your help!

Daniel

Quote from: Chuck
Daniel,

There is nothing in the rules that links a powers keywords to its damage type, there are obvious designs reasons that they are the same. A fire power is most likely going to deal fire but it is not required.

Changing the type of damage you deal with a power in no way effects the powers keyword and also the other way around.

Please let me know if you need anymore help!

Chuck

Quote from: Daniel
You've been incredibly helpful so far; thank you.

"There is nothing in the rules that links a powers keywords to its damage type, there are obvious designs reasons that they are the same. A fire power is most likely going to deal fire but it is not required." - Chuck

I really didn't expect this, and wanted to ask you one, last thing pertaining to it; just to finish clarifying.

"A power that deals acid damage is an acid effect and thus has the acid keyword." - PHB

If I understand correctly, you are saying that this quote from the PHB is an *example* of design decision, and *not* a rule to give damage a keyword.
Is this correct?

Again, thanks so much. You've been more than helpful.
Great Gaming!

Daniel

Quote from: Chuck (custserv)
Daniel,

It is an example, that is why that sentence starts with "For instance".

Please let me know if you need anymore help!

Chuck

I'd consider this an informed response.  He even went back to the page outside of what I quoted at him to further clarify.

It seems pretty clear to me...  (I'll probably post this over in the "Illusions" thread too)

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #26 on: June 24, 2008, 09:28:17 PM »
The thing that worries me about his response is he's ignoring the language of the example.  The example says it deals acid damage and *thus* has the acid keyword, implying a causal relationship.  The word "thus" is critical, and he totally ignores it.  While examples aren't universals, they can imply and demonstrate universals, and the 'universal' that example seems to be demonstrating is that damage type => keyword. 

I suppose more to the point: Yes, its an example.  But what its an example of is damage type causing the application of the related keyword.  If that general statement isn't true, why is the example in the PHB and what is it an example of?

If you don't ask that I might just have to...
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #27 on: June 24, 2008, 09:37:38 PM »
 ??? I thought it was clear that it was an example of a design decision (as they referenced in an earlier question).

*When making it*
"It does acid damage, so I should give it the acid keyword".  That was causal, but it was causal during the designing of the power.

What they've done is allowed for design creativity (and potentially inconsistency).

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #28 on: June 24, 2008, 09:52:09 PM »
??? I thought it was clear that it was an example of a design decision (as they referenced in an earlier question).

*When making it*
"It does acid damage, so I should give it the acid keyword".  That was causal, but it was causal during the designing of the power.

What they've done is allowed for design creativity (and potentially inconsistency).

"Thus" strikes me as stronger than reflecting the design process (although I agree the example is clearly indicative thereof as well), it makes the statement into an if-then example (if it has acid damage, then it has the acid keyword), and the thing it is actually an example of is any time something deals typed damage it also must have the related keyword, otherwise it fails as an example.

Also, design decisions in WotC books are discussed in sidebars with the title Behind the Curtain, not in-line with rules text.  Anything in the main text has the weight of rules unless it is clearly distinguished as fluff. 
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #29 on: June 24, 2008, 10:12:25 PM »
In no way do I wish to insult you with this, but arguing the implication of a single word seems a bit silly. :lol

"Thus" strikes me as a normal part of a thought process in that context...

That said, I'll take it as it is right now.  They've made it abundantly clear (to me) that most powers will follow the guidelines you prescribe, but that those guidelines are not hard-and-fast rules.

I'll leave you to do as you will, and I thoroughly enjoyed tossing this about with you.  (Debate is one of the best ways to learn)

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #30 on: June 24, 2008, 10:35:48 PM »
Ok, i'm convinced CustServe (or at least Paul) isn't playing with a full deck...

Follow-up to my initial question:
Quote from: me
I was happy with your response for awhile, but other people keep asking CustServe related questions which receive different answers.

Given you told me my interpretation was true (ie, that if a power deals X damage type it gains the x keyword), then what's the deal with the Class Acts Illusion spells? There are really two options:

(A) Was the psychic keyword omitted?

(B) Was the damage type incorrectly listed as psychic, and they should do untyped damage?

If neither of those are true, would you please revisit my original question?

Quote from: Paul@CustServe
The illusion spells deal Psychic damage. It does not deal untyped damage.

Yes, that's the complete answer (aside from his "Good Gaming" comment which seems to be part of his sig).  He didn't even answer my real question.  I have followed up and am really trying to not be deliberately insulting, but at this point I am exasperated.

---------
Summary thus far:
1) CustServe tells me that "dealing X damage type => X keyword" is true
2) CustServe tells me the illusion spells deal psychic damage

Conclusion based on what they've told me: The illusion spells have the psychic keyword.

Why am I getting a totally different response than other people asking basically the same question?
« Last Edit: June 24, 2008, 10:42:21 PM by Squirrelloid »
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

phelanarcetus

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 33
    • Email
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #31 on: June 25, 2008, 11:12:41 AM »
Because you're dealing with a different person in CustServ.  And they're obviously not coordinating with each other.

AlterFrom

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 561
  • Super Special Awesome
Re: Consolidated Customer Service Answers
« Reply #32 on: June 25, 2008, 08:11:00 PM »
Page 114, Battlefield Archer's "Archer's Glory" Answered by Marc
[spoiler]
Q. The Battlefield Archer paragon path grants an encounter utility power named "Archer's Glory." This power allows you to "gain an action point which you must spend before the end of your next turn." Does this power allow you to bypass the usual restriction of only 1 AP per encounter? That is, could you spend an action point before using the power and gain (and use) the bonus power point, or use the power and gain (and use) the bonus power point and then spend another action point? If neither of these situations are possible, what is the purpose of the power?

A. When you use Archer's Glory, you are still restricted to the one action point per encounter rule. The Purpose of this power is to gain an action point that you can use if you don't have one handy. For Example, lets say you used your action point during the last encounter and you don't currently have another action point. You enter into another encounter, with out taking an extended rest so you still do not have that action point. You can, use Archers Glory to gain an action point to use before the end of your next turn. At the end of this encounter you will have reached a milestone and you will get another action point.
[/spoiler]
Siggy
[spoiler]TIRED OF TRYING TO MANAGE FILES ACROSS SEVERAL COMPUTERS? GET DROPBOX AND SIMPLIFY THE PROCESS!


xkcd. It Rocks.

Tick, tock, Tick, tock...

FYI: I lose a couple years off my life anytime I see I have a PM.

Quote
We're ALL rules lawyers here. The BEST at what we do, too. It's like a Tom Grisham novel in which everybody at the top law firm is a dirty crook, but they all know the rules so well that TECHNICALLY speaking, they aren't breaking them...:eh

[/spoiler]