|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 9:09AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2008
|
I still agree with the benefits of combined damage. Immunity to necrotic damage doesn't protect you from necrotic and psychic damage. But I would say that immunity to necrotic damage should protect you from a rider on necrotic damage, regardless of how that damage was delivered.
To give a definite example: say you hit an ice devil with a cold power, and you have the lasting frost feat. So now the devil has vulnerabilty 5 cold, along with cold immunity.
If you hit the devil with another cold power, the vulnerability wouldn't do any thing, since it is anyway immune.
But do you think that if you hit it with a power that does cold and psychic damage, then it would take 5 extra damage due to the cold vulnerability?
Yes.
Its resistance against the combined Cold and Psychic damage is 0. It now has taken Cold and Psychic Damage.
Did it take Cold damage? If yes, then add 5 for Cold vulnerability.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 9:11AM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2004
|
And that extra damage from the vulnerability has type Cold and Psychic, too? Since it obviously can't just be cold?
Also, your question "Did it take Cold damage?" isn't quite right. It took Cold and Psychic damage, which you would claim is not Cold damage, but triggers vulnerability in the same was that Cold does. Right?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 9:38AM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
it absolutely can't be 10.
It's 10.
Is there a reason, or did you just think it would be funny?
imho, funny would've been something more like:
"It's not 10. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at 10. You're on 10 here, all the way up. Where can you go from there? Where? What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do? Put it up to 11."
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 11:10AM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2008
|
And that extra damage from the vulnerability has type Cold and Psychic, too? Since it obviously can't just be cold?
Also, your question "Did it take Cold damage?" isn't quite right. It took Cold and Psychic damage, which you would claim is not Cold damage, but triggers vulnerability in the same was that Cold does. Right?
I never claimed it wasn't cold damage. I said that when you are taking damage from a combined source your resistance equals the lower of the two. So yes, it triggers the cold vulnerability. A combined source is both cold and psychic and your resistance equals the lower of the two.
As per the example given under vulnerability in the compendium
'Vulnerability to a specific damage type applies even when that damage type is combined with another. For example, if you have vulnerable 5 fire, you take 5 extra damage when you take ongoing fire and radiant damage."
Now as to what kind of damage the extra damage it is unclear. The example above seems to indicate that its untyped (extra damage not extra fire damage), but in the example for vulnerability against non-combined damage the extra damage was typed. So you could very well make the argument that cold immunity would negate the lasting frost (or any vulnerability to cold). I'm of the mind its simpler to keep the extra damage untyped damage from combined damage.
A combined source is separate source. Just like taking (onging 5 damage and slow) and taking (ongoing 5 damage) are separate sources. You have to save against each separately, and both of their damages apply.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 11:26AM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2004
|
I never claimed it wasn't cold damage. I said that when you are taking damage from a combined source your resistance equals the lower of the two. So yes, it triggers the cold vulnerability. A combined source is both cold and psychic and your resistance equals the lower of the two.
I agree completely, and just think that an equivalent but more convenient way to say the same thing is that the damage acts like whatever type you have the lowest resistance to.
Now as to what kind of damage the extra damage it is unclear. The example above seems to indicate that its untyped (extra damage not extra fire damage), but in the example for vulnerability against non-combined damage the extra damage was typed. So you could very well make the argument that cold immunity would negate the lasting frost (or any vulnerability to cold). I'm of the mind its simpler to keep the extra damage untyped damage from combined damage.
Well, that runs into a little trouble, I think. Say you have resist 5 cold and vulnerable 5 cold, and someone deals 1 point of cold damage to you. Vulernability pumps that up to 6 cold, but then resistance drops it back down to 1.
Do the same thing with cold and psychic damage when you have vulnerability to cold and resistance to both cold and psychic. I'd have said it should work the same way as the single damage case. But if you claim the extra damage from vulnerability to be untyped, then your resistances wouldn't apply and you would take 6 points of damage.
A combined source is separate source. Just like taking (onging 5 damage and slow) and taking (ongoing 5 damage) are separate sources. You have to save against each separately, and both of their damages apply.
Interesting point. I do remember seeing this rule somewhere, is it in the PHB3?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 11:45AM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
A combined source is separate source. Just like taking (onging 5 damage and slow) and taking (ongoing 5 damage) are separate sources. You have to save against each separately, and both of their damages apply.
Interesting point. I do remember seeing this rule somewhere, is it in the PHB3?
From the forum FAQ (if desired):
"How do I make saving throws against the same ongoing effect from multiple enemies? Per PHB3 (p.222): "save: ...Identical Effects That a Save Can End: If you are subjected to identical effects that a save can end, including ongoing damage, you ignore all but one of those effects." Also, per the rules update: "When you are subjected to identical effects that end at different times, you ignore all the effects but the one that has the most time remaining. Effects that a save can end work differently, since you don’t know when they’re going to end. You, therefore, track effects that a save can end separately from effects that end at specific times."
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 11:49AM
#57
|
|
|
FYI, CustServ likes comparing by simple types across your ongoing effects.
1. If my character is affected by:
ongoing 5 fire
ongoing 5 cold
ongoing 5 fire and cold
A. You must make three saves, to end all three ongoing damage. But you'll only take 10 damage, as you take the highest of the same time.
time = type
"At a certain point, one simply has to accept that some folks will see what they want to see..." Dragon 387
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 12:28PM
#58
|
|
|
5 ongoing necrotic
+
5 ongoing Poison
+
5 ongoing necrotic and poison
=
5 ongoing necrotic and poison
Rules:
5 ongoing necrotic + 5 ongoing necrotic = 5 necrotic damage from 1 source : REMEBER THIS FOR LATER
5 ongoing poison + 5 ongoing necrotic = 10 damage from 2 sources (5 poison, 5 necrotic)
5 ongoing necrotic + 5 ongoing necrotic and poison = 5 damage : We are only going to take necrotic damage once, we can not take it twice, since we are taking the poison from the poison/necrotic source, that is the source of necrotic damage we take.
5 ongoing poison + 5 ongoing necrotic and poison = 5 damage : We are only going to take poison damage once, we can not take it twice, since we are taking the necrotic from the poison/necrotic source, that is the source of poison damage we take.
5 ongoing poison + 5 ongoing necrotic + 5 ongoing necrotic and poison = 5 damage : We are only going to take poison damage once, we can not take it twice, since we are taking the necrotic from the poison/necrotic source, that is the source of poison damage we take.
Also we are only going to take necrotic damage once, we can not take it twice, since we are taking the poison from the poison/necrotic source, that is the source of necrotic damage we take.
edit:fixed last para
"Oh bother." sighed Pooh as he chambered another round.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 12:48PM
#59
|
|
|
I don't think your first example is correct Tsuul. You only combine the effects if they are identical and Ongoing 5 Necrotic/Poison is not the same as effect as Ongoing 5 Necrotic. For a better example, if you have two effects on you 1) Dazed and Ongoing 5 Necrotic (save ends both) and 2) Ongoing 5 Necrotic you are still making two saving throws against those effects even though you only take 5 Necrotic damage at the start of your turn because they are different effects.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 13, 2010 - 12:50PM
#60
|
|
|
But why are you unwilling to extend that same logic to ongoing damage? Go ahead and say ongoing damage AC is a unique type. But when you combine ongoing damage of type A with ongoing damage of type C, the result counts as type AC for the purpose of stacking. This seems exactly parallel to your resistance argument.
I'm pefectly willing to exdtend that same logic, however, WotC is not. I'm just doing my best to explain the mechanical rules they laid into place. I can't be held responsible for whether WotC applies the same logic to every circumstance or not. 
|
|
|
