Confusing Wording

Pedro
So you can follow up the Unbalancing Attack with a Spell and get the bonus? Just double checking.

John

Yep, you deal the bonus damage..

you just don’t heal the additional damage with PoF

I can see someone using this, they swing with their sword forcing the target off balance… step back and cast a spell taking advantage of the opening in the target’s defenses.

the extra damage granted by the combat maneuver is not the spell’s damage, it’s the maneuver’s damage.

re reading the thread, i still have no idea what your asking for mith, other than some sort of blanket ruling…. can you break down what your asking for?

Yes please….

So this ruling bothered me.

I get that with Vampiric spells (and effects), they should not benefit from external damage boost. That’s fine, I’m cool with that. That’s a ruling one can make. But this wording, in the bold, is wrong and gives the impression that additional damage is from different sources is all seperate. It isn’t maneuver damage, it is bonus dice damage from the maneuver source, but it is still spell damage.

Is my bonus damage from a talent not a part of the spell?

Is my rune damage seperate from my weapon?

Is my Unbalancing Attack damage seperate from my next weapon attack/maneuver. Does my opponent get AR against both sources?

Is Unbalancing attacks extra dice it’s own separate source of damage and thus stacking doesn’t apply for a UB followed by a Vital Strike?

Is the bonus damage from Brittle Bones seperate from my weapon/maneuver damage thus both subject to AR?

Again, I understand the Vampiric damage thing, I just think you should word this ruling better.

Also a ruling/clarification for spells like Channeling getting extra damage might be nice as well (not Vampiric but heals and damages).