Toxifier: What counts as an "enchanted weapon"?

[ArchonShiva]

On the contrary, it is quite clear, despite not necessarily making sense: the cap is per attack. So no.

House rule it if you want something better.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by ArchonShiva

On the contrary, it is quite clear, despite not necessarily making sense: the cap is per attack. So no.

House rule it if you want something better.

A Follow-up is a separate attack though.

[ArchonShiva]

That’s GURPS. DFRPG defines follow-up as a secondary effect, it’s not called another attack (although there is mention of the “primary attack” in the case of Contact Agent).

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by ArchonShiva

That’s GURPS. DFRPG defines follow-up as a secondary effect, it’s not called another attack (although there is mention of the “primary attack” in the case of Contact Agent).

'Primary' is right there under Follow-Up: "The primary effect is always damage of some kind..."


My ruling? It's a second effect, so it's separate.

[ArchonShiva]

I’m not arguing that it doesn’t distinguish primary and secondary effects, I’m arguing that it never describes the secondary effect as a separate attacks, which is the word that diffuses caps injury on.

Yes, I absolutely house rule them as separate in my campaign. No, RAW is not ambiguous on this point.