pathfinder 1e – Does Empower spell increase the damage dealt by a Mage’s Sword?

Yes, you can Empower mage’s sword

There’s nothing in the description of either the Empower Spell feat or the mage’s sword spell that precludes them working together. Mage’s sword is a spell with a variable numeric effect – the damage it deals – and so if it is empowered it increases that damage by 50%.

If you were to empower a summon monster spell, you’re correct that the damage that the summoned creatures deal is not increased by 50%, as the damage dealt by a summoned monster is not a variable property of the spell itself. You would, however, summon 50% more monsters than usual, if you used one of the forms of the spell that summons a randomly determined number of creatures.

dnd 5e – Is there a difference between “damage taken” and “damage dealt”?

The rules themselves do not address this issue clearly, but the Sage Advice Compendium does… sort of

The following Q&A can be found in the Sage Advice Compendium:

Q. When a creature successfully saves against guardian of faith and takes 10 radiant damage, how much damage does that count against the total amount of damage the spell can deal? Is it 20 because that’s how much it dealt or 10 because that’s how much the target took?

A. It dealt 10 damage to the creature, so 10 is subtracted from the total.

Now, looking at the guardian of faith spell, it states:

(…) The creature takes 20 radiant damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. The guardian vanishes when it has dealt a total of 60 damage (…)

And from this, we conclude almost everything we need.

Part of the question assumes that the target took 10 damage and that the attack dealt 20 damage:

Is it 20 because that’s how much it dealt or 10 because that’s how much the target took?

Meanwhile, the answer simply states that the guardian dealt 10 damage, meaning it did not deal 20 damage. It similarly never refutes the claim that the target actually took 10 damage, so we can assume this too to be the case.

And so, the guardian dealt 10 damage and the target took 10 damage, despite the halving that occurred. From these we can conclude that damage taken and damage dealt are equivalent quantities.


And yet, of course, there are problems

There are answers that argue these quantities must be different for certain features to make sense, and they are correct:

Resistance and then vulnerability are applied after all other modifiers to damage. For example, a creature has resistance to bludgeoning damage and is hit by an attack that deals 25 bludgeoning damage. The creature is also within a magical aura that reduces all damage by 5. The 25 damage is first reduced by 5 and then halved, so the creature takes 10 damage.

Whenever the golem is subjected to acid damage, it takes no damage and instead regains a number of hit points equal to the acid damage dealt.

From the first quote, one would note that it literally says the attack deals 25 damage and the target takes 10 damage. And from the second quote, if these were the same quantity then the Golem taking no damage would mean that no damage was dealt which means it would always regain zero hit points, which makes no sense. Thus, a non-zero amount of acid damage must have been dealt which is different from the damage the Golem takes.

I really have no way to argue against these claims other than that the books use Standard English and English is weird sometimes. I can find no way to reconcile “these quantities are always the same” with making that first quote and that feature ever making sense. You can treat them as separate quantities when needed, but the SAC treats that as the same quantity (at least in the case of guardian of faith).

I think my best argument for these quantities being the same thing is that if they were supposed to be different, that would have been explicitly stated, it wouldn’t have been loosely alluded to in a few rules scattered throughout the books that only occasionally made use of the distinction that otherwise never came up.


And then the SAC makes it all more complicated…

There is another Q&A in the Sage Advice Compendium that that states:

Q. How does Arcane Ward interact with temporary hit points and damage resistance that an abjurer might have?

A. An Arcane Ward is not an extension of the wizard who creates it. It is a magical effect with its own hit points. Any temporary hit points, immunities, or resistances that the wizard has don’t apply to the ward.

The ward takes damage first. Any leftover damage is taken by the wizard and goes through the following game elements in order: (1) any relevant damage immunity, (2) any relevant damage resistance, (3) any temporary hit points, and (4) real hit points.

Now let’s also look at the text of the Arcane Ward feature:

(…) Whenever you take damage, the ward takes the damage instead. (…)

Notably, this happens when you take damage, and from the SAC Q&A we can see that damage taken must be calculated before resistance is applied. But then what would we call the damage that happens after resistances are applied? Yeah… it’s a mess and I do not believe the various features throughout these games were written with a level of precision that allows one to meaningfully analyze these terms in their entirety.

There just are edge cases and problems that arise under either interpretation (different quantities, or the same quantity), and resolving them is… unclear. I suppose, at the end of the day, the best you can do is ask your GM.

dnd 5e – What’s the maximum (average) damage that can be dealt in one round by a 20th level character with at least two levels of Fighter?

Expected Average Damage: 641.354, Maximum Damage: 1185

No items or spell components, no special circumstances. Legal for use in Adventurer’s League. Attacking with Surprise.

Half-Orc (Arthur) (Savage Attacks add an extra die of damage on every critical hit)

Divine Soul Sorcerer 4 (Favored by the Gods, Shadow Blade spell, Subtle Spell meta-magic, ASI)

War Domain Cleric 1 (War Priest – make one weapon attack as a Bonus Action)

Assassin Rogue 3 (Assassinate – if surprised, advantage on all attacks, critical on all hits, 2d6 Sneak Attack with Finesse weapons per turn, Expertise: Stealth, Perception)

Battle Master Fighter 3 (Action Surge, 4 Maneuvers, including Precision Attack, Menacing Attack, and Disarming Attack, Fighting Style Dueling)

Paladin 2 (Divine Smite, Divine Sense, Fighting Style Armored)

Divination Tradition Wizard 2 (Portent)

Gloom Stalker Ranger 5 (Dread Ambusher: in the first round you gain an extra attack on every Attack action in the first round, +10 movement, extra 1d8 damage of the weapon’s type on this extra attack, Primeval Awareness, Pass without a Trace, Longstrider, ASI, Fighting Style Archery)

Strength 14 + 2 + 2 ASI

Dexterity 13

Constitution 8 + 1

Intelligence 13

Wisdom 13

Charisma 13

  • To-Hit: +11, +12-19 with Precision Attack
  • Hit Points: 92
  • AC: 19 (Breastplate, Armored Fighting Style, Shield)
  • Stealth: +23 (Expertise and temporary boost from Pass without a Trace)
  • Initiative: +2 (+1 Dexterity, +1 Wisdom from Dread Ambusher)
  • Perception: +13 (Expertise)
  • Level 10 spellcaster (4 Sorcerer + 1 Cleric + (2 Paladin + 5 Ranger)/2 + 2 Wizard)
  • Movement speed: 40 feet (50 feet with Longstrider)
  • Darkvision: 90ft

The crux of it is that you have created a truly dreadful ambush character which has significant precision-boosting skills and tracking skills for his enemies. Beyond just being able to hit things hard, they also are able to do so with uncanny accuracy. This character goes patrolling for evil and predators in the woods, using his Primeval Awareness (L1 spell slot) to identify that there is evil in his land. As he uses his hunting ability to stalk his prey, his high perception and natural stealth make it difficult for his quarry to hide and make himself similarly difficult if not nearly impossible to spot. He’d use Pass Without a Trace, perhaps subtly, so that he could sneak up on his quarry. As he draws near and identifies his target, he casts Longstrider from his Ranger spells using the Subtle Spell meta-magic just to give himself that extra boost in movement that he’ll need in order to close with his quarry before it realizes the danger. He knows how long it will take him to get into striking range, and stealthily moves to within 50 feet of his target. He has foreseen this day’s events, and knows that death awaits his enemy. Patiently, he waits until it’s his turn to strike. In terms of the sequence of events, I imagine it would look like this:

Primeval Awareness of the quarry, Subtle Pass without a Trace + Subtle Longstrider during the hunt for the quary. In the preparation round, cast Subtle Shadow Blade L5, from which the surprise round begins. Portent determines the initiative order for the target and the attacker: + Assassinating Critical: Action Surge + Dueling Attacks + Divine Smites + Dread Ambusher + Sneak Attack + Bonus Action War Priest weapon attack with Divine Smite.

  • Spending 2L5, 3L4, 3L3, Spell Slots, all maneuvers, action surge, divine favor, War Priest ability
  • Optional for flavor Spend another L2, 2L1 Spell slots: use a level 1 spell slot for Primeval Awareness to identify that your enemy exists nearby, then cast Pass without a Trace and Longstrider using Subtle Spell to hunt them and ambush them successfully.

Preparation Round:
Level 5 Shadow Blade. (4d8 psychic damage per melee attack)

Surprise Round:
Initiative: Use Portent rolls to guarantee Assassinate feature works.
Action: Attack action (2 attacks from Ranger, +1 attack from Dread Ambusher feature)
*Bonus Action: 1 attack through War Priest
Action Surge: Attack action (2 attacks from Ranger, +1 attack from Dread Ambusher feature)

The Math on the Damage:

(All dice are doubled because these are critical hits because of Assassinate)

Every attack that hits results in this: 2$times$4d8 Psychic (Shadow Blade, Level 5) + 1d8 Savage Attack + 2 Dueling Fighting Style + 5 Strength modifier = 9d8 + 7 Psychic damage

7 attacks (3 attacks per action, plus 1 attack from War Priest) yield: 63d8 + 49 Psychic damage

Gloom Stalker Ranger allows us to adds 1d8 damage of the original weapon’s damage type to the extra attack of every Attack action we take in the first round of combat through the Gloom Stalker feature. Since we take two Attack actions through Action Surge, we get extra 2d8 Psychic damage, which is doubled since they’re critical hits. 67d8 + 49 Psychic damage

Assassin Rogue allows us to add 2d6 Sneak Attack damage because Shadow Blade is a Finesse weapon. Sneak attack rules for rogues do not require you to use Dexterity when using Finesse weapons. Since the attack is a critical hit, the damage gets doubled. 67d8 + 4d6 + 49 Psychic

As a paladin, every successful hit allows us to add 2d8 + (spell slot level-1)$times$1d8 radiant damage, maxing out at 5d8 for an L4 spell slot or higher. As a 10th level spellcaster, after casting Shadow Blade at level 5, we can use 3 L4 spell slots, 1 L5 spell slot, and 3 L3 spell slots. All of this, of course, gets doubled on critical hits, which these will be. This results in the following additional damage: 2$times$(3$times$5d8 + 1$times$5d8 + 3$times$4d8) = 64d8 Radiant damage

Damage Total:

(67d8 + 4d6 + 49 Psychic) + (64d8 Radiant) = (67$times$4.5 + 4$times$3.5 + 49 Psychic) + (64$times$4.5 Radiant) = 364.5 Psychic + 288 Radiant = 652.5 total

In order for the Assassinate feature to work, during the first round of combat the Assassin must act before their quarry. By having access to Portent, we will have two dice rolls which can be used for any ability check, which includes initiative. Because the quarry has a +0 to their initiative and our character has a +2 to initiative, regardless of what we roll, we can substitute the lower of the two Portent rolls to the target and use the higher of the two rolls for ourselves.

Damage, adjusted for accuracy:

The following probability calculations below were made with the help of the table in the article “D&D 5e: Probabilities for Advantage and Disadvantage” to figure out the likelihood of rolling particular numbers on a 20-sided die with advantage.

At least one attack will always hit. It’s true that it’s mathematically possible for a 1 to be rolled on every single attack die (7 attacks, all with advantage), but the odds of that are ridiculously low: $left(left(frac{1}{20}right)^2right)^7$ = 0.0000000000000000006103515625. In other words, the Sneak Attack will always be added.

Precision Attack maneuvers and the Favored by the Gods feature allow the player to use them after the attack roll is made and any of these three abilities can be used in conjunction with one another.

With our target having an AC of 20, and our character having a starting +11 to hit, we need to roll 9 or higher in order to successfully land a hit, which from the table we can see that we have an 84% likelihood through advantage.

The Precision Attack maneuver from the Battle Master, adds 1d8 to attack rolls, yielding 4.5 average increase in likelihood. This can be used on 4 attacks, resulting in +15.5 to attack rolls, since we have 4 superiority dice from the Battle Master. In addition, the Favored by the Gods Divine Soul Sorcerer feature will allow us to add 2d4 to one attack that misses, turning it into a hit on average, due to effectively adding +5 to hit (resulting in a +16 to hit) for one of the two attacks which we cannot add the Battle Master die to. As a result, for 1 attack we need to roll 4 or higher through advantage to score a hit, and for 4 of the other 5 attacks we need to roll 4.5 or higher through advantage in order to score a hit.

The optimal strategy of their use should look something like this:

  1. Our attacks, whenever possible, should be sequenced from most damaging to least damaging, in order to take advantage of our ability to lazily add attack bonuses.
  2. Similarly, we should use our spell slots for Divine Smite in a decreasing progression. The Bonus Action attack will use the L5 spell slot, the first three attacks of the first Attack action will each use an L4 spell slot, and the three attacks of the second Attack action will each use an L3 spell slot.
  3. If an attack misses and we still have a superiority die, we should use the Precision Attack adds an average of 4.5 to the attack roll.
  4. If the total for the attack roll is still too low and we still can use Favored by the Gods, we should use it.
  5. If the number of attacks remaining is less than the number of superiority dice remaining and we haven’t applied a maneuver to the attack, we should apply a damaging maneuver like Menacing Attack or Disarming Attack.

The Bonus Action weapon attack will average (2$times$4d8 + 1d8 + 7) Psychic + 2$times$5d8 Radiant = 47.5 Psychic + 45 Radiant = 92.5 damage. Adjusted for the likelihood of a natural 1, the accuracy adjustment reduces the expected damage total by: -92.5*(1-0.84) = -14.8

When using Favored by the Gods, our to hit becomes +16 on average, which means we need to roll 4 or higher through advantage. On the referenced table, we see that for this we have a 97.8% likelihood. The damage for this attack will be (2$times$4d8 + 1d8 + 7) Psychic damage and (2$times$5d8) Radiant = 9d8 + 7 Psychic + 10d8 Radiant = 47.5 Psychic + 45 Radiant = 92.5 damage. Adjusted for accuracy, this means that the damage total is lessened by -(1-0.978)$times$92.5 = -2.035.

When using the Precision Attack maneuver, since the AC of the target is 20 and we will need to roll “5.5”, the average (I think) will be (97.8% + 96%)/2 = 96.9%. This means that each of the 4 attacks with maneuvers has a 96.9% chance to hit. So, we will on average do 96.9% of the expected damage for those 4 attacks. The damage of these 4 attacks of the two Attack actions is: 4$times$1d8 + 2$times$4$times$4d8 + 2$times$1d8 + 4$times$7 Psychic + 2$times$(4d8 + 4d8 + 5d8 + 5d8) Radiant = (38d8 + 28) Psychic + (36d8 Radiant) = 199 Psychic + 162 Radiant = 361 total damage. Adjusting for accuracy, this means that the previously mentioned “total damage” is also lessened by -361$times$ (1 – 0.969) = -11.191

On each of the 4 attacks on which we use a superiority die, if the attack doesn’t need the accuracy boost, we can apply the die to the damage by using a different maneuver, such as Disarming Attack, doubling it because of the critical hit. This results in 2$times$1d8 damage = 9 damage. How often would we get to add this extra damage? Since the original to-hit modifier is +11, hitting AC 20 would happen 84% of the time. Thus, 84% of the time, we can substitute a damaging maneuver instead of the Precision Attack Battle Master maneuver. Thus, the expected damage is increased by: 0.84$times$9 onto every attack, for four attacks: 0.84$times$9$times$4 = +30.24

The 3rd attack from the second Attack can do (2$times$4d8 + 1d8 + 7) Psychic damage and (2$times$4d8) Radiant = 9d8 + 7 Psychic + 8d8 Radiant = 47.5 Psychic + 36 Radiant = 83.5 damage. As such, the damage expected for the last attack will be 83.5*(1-0.84) = -13.36.

Adjusted for accuracy, then, this means that the expected average damage of this character is 652.5 -14.8 – 2.035 -11.191 + 30.24 -13.36 = 641.354 total damage

Hope this math was relatively easy to follow, and hope you guys enjoyed the character and story setup as well. And be aware, the optimal use of the superiority dice and Favored by the Gods could improve this by a few more points.

*Note: Originally, I came up with a slightly higher number by using a Quickened Booming Blade. However, that spell is from Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide, and because many of the other features referenced here are from Xanathar’s Guide to Everything, in Adventurer’s League we wouldn’t be able to use both for this character. *

It’s worth noting, since the original poster mentioned this looking like a Death Knight, that this build would probably work even better against a Death Knight, because the latter’s shield and sword can be removed through the Disarming Attack maneuver, thus lowering his AC and removing its ability to parry with his reaction.

*Note: Another poster, Herohersh (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/138689/49041), cleverly suggested that based on the guidelines for this math problem you could use your action to Create Bonfire during the setup round when you’re casting Shadow Blade, step into the bonfire in order to trigger Absorb Elements through your reaction, and then proceed to attack using the bonus damage of Absorb Elements. In addition to probably not working mechanically due to stipulations regarding casting any other spell during the same round during which a Bonus Action spell is cast, for my personal taste I find this unsatisfying because it breaks the immersion and idea that you could still be hidden from your enemy the round before you attack if you conjure a bonfire that gives away your position. *

How have you dealt with link penalties?

How have you dealt with link penalties?

pr.probability – How to Calculate 5 to 11-Card Poker Straights When Dealt 11 Cards from 8-Deck Shoe

I’m looking for how to calculate the odds of a 5-card straight poker hand formed from 11 cards dealt from an 8-deck shoe, and then the odds for a 6-card straight out of those 11 cards, and then the same for 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11-card straights, all formed from 11-cards randomly dealt from a shuffled 8-deck shoe of 52-card poker decks (no jokers).

I understand how to calculate the odds of a straight formed from 5 cards dealt from a single 52-card deck. There are plenty of resources for calculating poker hand probabilities dealt from a single-deck shoe (i.e., a single deck of 52 cards), but I cannot for the life of me find any resources online regarding poker probability math from a multi-deck shoe, whether that’s 2 decks, 4 decks, 8 decks as in my case, etc.

This problem also has the compounding factor that it’s not just five card stud, but 11 cards dealt.

This seems a relatively trivial problem, but I’m afraid I’m going to mess up my calculations without realizing my error. I’d love any assistance, thanks!

The exceeding damage dealt by a attack on a zombie is counted to the undead fortitude?

If a fighter deals 13 damage on a zombie (https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Zombie#content) that has 1 hitpoint, for the zombie pass the dc he would have to roll 6 or 18?

dnd 5e – What is the damage dealt by Eldritch Smite?

Eldritch Smite is an Eldritch Invocation for Warlocks similar to the Divine Smite feature from Paladins. It is available in Xanathar’s Guide to Everything and states

Once per turn when you hit a creature with your pact weapon, you can expend a warlock spell slot to deal an extra 1d8 force damage to the target, plus another 1d8 per level of the spell slot, and you can knock the target prone if it is Huge or smaller.

So, let us say a 5th level Warlock (single class) uses its 3rd level spell slot to proc Eldritch Smite on an enemy they hit.

What damage do they roll?

I am asking this because a Warlock that I have been playing with recently (we are running Dungeon of the Mad Mage) has been rolling 3d8, but my reading is that it should be 4d8.

To be clear on the reasoning, these are the two interpretations clashing:

  1. Casting it as 1st level is 1d8, and any extra level is +1d8. This gives 3d8.
  2. Casting it naturally deals 1d8, independent of spell slot. Then another (level)d8 dice from the spell slot. This gives 4d8.

Ultimately I find the wording confusing. The first interpretation is in line with how spells are usually described, but the second is what I understood when reading it. I figured I would ask before telling the other player he has been rolling wrong for weeks (and maybe being wrong myself when doing so).

For comparison, Divine Smite is way more precise in its wording:

Starting at 2nd Level, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon’s damage. The extra damage is 2d8 for a 1st-level spell slot, plus 1d8 for each spell level higher than 1st (…)

To be clear on my expectations on the answers: either a compelling and careful argument on the reading, or any further clarification from any official source, even as simple as an example of damage calculation where it is clear which damage was rolled.


Related:
This answer seems to be using my interpretation in its math, as well as this. This answer also seems to be using the second interpretation (4th level spell slot = 5d8 damage). Finally, this question also assumes the second interpretation.

graphs – Trivial clarification with the analysis of the Dijkstra Algorithm as dealt with in Keneth Rosen’s “Discrete Mathematics and its Application”

I was going through the text, “Discrete Mathematics and its Application” by Kenneth Rosen where I came across the analysis of the Dijkstra Algorithm and felt that the values at some places of the analysis are not quite appropriate. The main motive of my question is not the analysis of the Dijkstra Algorithm in general( a better version and more clearer version exists in the CLRS text) but my main motive is analysis of the algorithm acurately as far as the mathematics is concerned, considering the below algorithm as just an unknown algorithm whose analysis is required to be done. I just want to check my progress by the fact that whether the thing which I pointed out as being weird, is actually weird or not.

Lets move on to the question. Below is the algorithm in the text.

ALGORITHM: Dijkstra’s Algorithm.

procedure Dijkstra(G: weighted connected simple graph, with all weights positive)  

    {G has vertices a = v(1), ... ,v(n) = z and weights w(v(j), v(j)) 
    where w(v(j), v(j)) = ∞ if {v(i),v(j)) is not an edge in G}

    for i: = 1 to n
        L(v(i)) := ∞ 
    L(a) := 0 
    S:=∅ 
    {the labels are now initialized so that the label of a is 0 and all 
        other labels are ∞, and S is the empty set} 

    while z ∉ S 
        u := a vertex not in S with L(u) minimal 
        S:= S ∪ {u} 
        for all vertices v not in S 
            if L(u) + w(u, v) < L(v) then 
                L(v) := L(u) + w(u, v) 
            {this adds a vertex to S with minimal label and updates the labels of vertices not in S}            return L(z) 
{L(z) = length of a shortest path from a to z}

The following is the analysis which they used:

We can now estimate the computational complexity of Dijkstra’s algorithm (in terms of additions and comparisons). The algorithm uses no more than $n − 1$ iterations where $n$ is the number of vertices in the graph, because one vertex is added to the distinguished set at each iteration. We are done if we can estimate the number of operations used for each iteration. We can identify the vertex not in S in the $k$th iteration with the smallest label using no more than $n − 1$ comparisons. Then we use an addition and a comparison to update the label of each vertex not in S in the $k$th iteration . It follows that no more than $2(n − 1)$ operations are used at each iteration, because there are no more than $n − 1$ labels to update at each iteration.

The algorithm uses no more than $n − 1$ iterations where $n$ is the number of vertices in the graph, because one vertex is added to the distinguished set at each iteration., What I feel is that it shall be $n$ iterations and not $n$ as in the very first iteration the vertex $a$ is included in the set $S$ and the process continues till $z$ is inserted into the set $S$ and $z$ may be the last vertex in the ordering i.e.$v_n$.

The rest statements are fine I hope.

spells: how much total damage is dealt in this attack scenario?

I would like to advance this question with the information that our campaign has determined that fighting attempts can be initiated from any melee attack, including the tactile attack that is granted by casting a harmful tactile spell, so it is legal at our table.

Bob the Dwarven Runesmith is preparing to deal with Gack the Orc Necromancer. Bob is on level 6 (fighter 1, transmutator 4, runesmith 1) and wears gloves and has armor tips on the armor of his chest plate. It has force 16 for a force modifier +3.

Bob wins the initiative. He throws fire leaves (quick action) on his gauntlets and armor spikes. Then defensively throws a corrosive grip (standard action) and uses the associated tactical attack to initiate an attack. Assuming that Bob hits with the tactile attack and gains control of the opposite fight, exactly how much damage does he do and from what sources? Consider the possibility of corrosive grip, blades of fire, damage of hooks, spikes of armor and bonus of strength.

I am asking this question because here there are many more than obvious interactions (at least for me), and I would like to make sure that I am not missing anything. For example, I know that, at a minimum, the corrosive grip will activate in the attack of the hook and then again in doing damage with the hook. I'm not sure, however, if the armor tips fire a second time (as long as the charges remain). In the same way, would fire leaves shoot in the attempt to fight? I do not think so, but the fire leaves specifically say that they accumulate with another energy damage inflicted, so touching someone with the glove and doing acid damage can also cause the fire leaves to be damaged. Finally, I'm not clear about the interaction with armor spikes and force damage. I believe that the weapon damage includes the relevant force modifier, so adding damage from armor points to claw damage would mean a 2x total force modifier. I also want to make sure that there is no other rule that I do not know to ask.

spells: how much total damage is dealt in the attack scenario?

Bob the Dwarven Runesmith is preparing to deal with Gack the Orc Necromancer. Bob is on level 6 (fighter 1, transmutator 4, runesmith 1) and wears gloves and has armor tips on the armor of his chest plate. It has force 16 for a force modifier +3.

Bob wins the initiative. He throws fire leaves (quick action) on his gauntlets and armor spikes. Then defensively throws a corrosive grip (standard action) and uses the associated tactical attack to initiate an attack. Assuming that Bob hits with the tactile attack and gains control of the opposite fight, exactly how much damage does he do and from what sources? Consider the possibility of corrosive grip, blades of fire, damage of hooks, spikes of armor and bonus of strength.