|
3 years ago ::
Aug 06, 2010 - 8:04AM
#171
|
|
|
That's fine, but by saying "We should do it the way a lot of other things are done" is a RAI argument, not a RAW argument, so beating everyone else over the head for not following the RAW (WARNING: I've only been paying attention to the last page or so, where it was an accusation, not saying it's the truth. Necessarily. I'm just asking the tough questions!) no longer really works once we accept that we're making some assumptions on how things work based on other systems within the game.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 06, 2010 - 8:15AM
#172
|
|
|
That's fine, but by saying "We should do it the way a lot of other things are done" is a RAI argument, not a RAW argument, so beating everyone else over the head for not following the RAW (WARNING: I've only been paying attention to the last page or so, where it was an accusation, not saying it's the truth. Necessarily. I'm just asking the tough questions!) no longer really works once we accept that we're making some assumptions on how things work based on other systems within the game.
Ah, but now we're talking about "how to apply Resist All in the weird edge cases where a certain type of damage getting through Resistance matters", which is not the original question at all.
Things that affect Resist Whatever only affect Whatever. "All" is not "Whatever", therefore ignoring Resist Whatever does not ignore Resist All. That much is perfectly clear.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 06, 2010 - 8:18AM
#173
|
|
|
Oh, yeah, certainly, we're no longer talking about the topic of the thread, that much is true. If I were a Mod, I'm come along and say "HEY YOU! RESPECT MAH AUTHORITY. GET BACK ON TOPIC!"
It's a good thing I'm not a Mod!
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2010 - 9:05PM
#174
|
Date Joined:
Feb 14, 2005
|
ok I got to about page 5 trying to read this before I said F* it. I hate being a rules lawyer but in this case I feel I must. first I define resistance. ResistA creature that has resistance takes less damage from a specific damage type. For example, a creature that has resist 10 fire takes 10 less damage whenever it takes fire damage.
Against Combined Damage Types: Your resistance is ineffective against combined damage types unless you have resistance to each of the damage types, and then only the weakest of the resistances applies. For example, if you have resist 10 lightning and resist 5 thunder and an attack deals 15 lightning and thunder damage to you, you take 10 damage, because the resistance to the combined damage types is limited by the lesser of the two resistances.
Not Cumulative: Resistances against the same damage type are not cumulative. Only the highest resistance applies. For example, if you have resist 5 cold and then gain resist 10 cold, you have resist 10 cold, not resist 15 cold. Similarly, if you have resist 5 cold and then gain resist 2 to all damage, you still have resist 5 cold, not resist 7 cold. Published in Monster Manual 2. looks simple enough to me if you think about it when you have the Resist Trait you have a resistance to the damage mentioned where as if your resist trait is Resist 5 All then it is a matter of having resistance to all forms of damage. Next I will post the rules for Venom Hand Master. Venom Hand MasterHeroic Tier
Prerequisite: Assassin
Benefit: Your attacks ignore poison resistance and poison immunity. Published in Dragon Magazine 379. I see that the feat says that is ignores poison resistance and poison immunity NOT Resist Poison. Now if you goblins put your minds together and think this through. Resist Poison provides Poison Resistance Resist All provides Poison Resistance Venom Hand Master ignores Poison Resistance thus Venom Hand Master ignores Resist Poison Venom Hand Master ignores Resist All Now if you choose to continue with that Resist All does not provide resistance to poison then this is a completely mute point and poison damage ignores Resist Al
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2010 - 9:08PM
#175
|
|
|
Now if you goblins put your minds together and think this through.
Resist Poison provides Poison Resistance
Resist All provides Poison Resistance
No. Resist All provides Resist All. "All" is not "Poison" - they don't even have any of the same letters. I don't know why this is complicated.
Treating Resist All as "Resist X and Resist Y and Resist Z" for all possible sets of A-Z produces results that do not match up with Resist All.
Now if you choose to continue with that Resist All does not provide resistance to poison then this is a completely mute point and poison damage ignores Resist All
First: "moot" point.
Second: "I can ignore X!" does not let you ignore Y, no matter what X and Y are, because X and Y are not the same, and this is D&D. Powers to EXACTLY what they say they do, nothing more, nothing less. "Resist All" is a Resistance, but it is not "resistance to poison". It stops poison damage because it stops ALL damage. It is not affected by things that affect poison resistance because it is not poison resistance.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2010 - 9:17PM
#176
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2006
|
Deama: The game uses "____ resistance" interchangeably with "Resist ____" Case in point: Mass Resistance Daily  ArcaneMinor Action Close burst 10Target: You and each ally in burstEffect: Choose acid, cold, fire, force, lightning, necrotic, poison, psychic, radiant, or thunder. Until the end of the encounter, each target gains resistance to that damage type equal to one-half your level + your Intelligence modifier.
I choose radiant. What have I given myself and my allies? Resist (one-helf my level + my Int mod) Radiant. Another example: Shielding Nimbus Daily DivineMinor Action Personal
Effect: Choose a damage type: acid, cold, fire, force, lightning, necrotic, poison, psychic, radiant, or thunder. You gain resist 10 to that damage type until the end of the encounter. If you already have resistance to that damage type, the resistance increases by 5 until the end of the encounter.
The above power (Shielding Nimbus) says you gain resist 10 to that damage type, and then in the next line says if you already have resistance to that damage type (IE Resist ____) the resistance inreases by 5 (IE Resist 8 Necrotic becomes Resist 13 Necrotic). Edit: In addition, for clarity, Shielding Nimbus would not increase resist all by 5.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2010 - 9:26PM
#177
|
Date Joined:
Feb 14, 2005
|
No. Resist All provides Resist All. "All" is not "Poison" - they don't even have any of the same letters. I don't know why this is complicated.
Treating Resist All as "Resist X and Resist Y and Resist Z" for all possible sets of A-Z produces results that do not match up with Resist All.
Then it is simple remove resist all completely because it resist "ALL" damage not Damage "X", "Y". or "Z"
First: "moot" point.
Second: "I can ignore X!" does not let you ignore Y, no matter what X and Y are, because X and Y are not the same, and this is D&D. Powers to EXACTLY what they say they do, nothing more, nothing less. "Resist All" is a Resistance, but it is not "resistance to poison". It stops poison damage because it stops ALL damage. It is not affected by things that affect poison resistance because it is not poison resistance.
Yes I know sometimes I misspell things, I usually try to catch them before posting but hey I am only human. I am not saying the something that bypasses Poison Resistance will bypass Cold as you seem to be insinuating I am I am saying that something that bypasses poison resistance will bypass anything and I mean ANYTHING that provides suce resistance.
Now think about this if Resist All is not resistance to "X" then it does not reduce damage to "X" plain and simple.
@sharkpower: That is an oversight of the designers plain and simple, they make a mistake and people want to restrain everyone else.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2010 - 9:33PM
#178
|
|
|
No. Resist All provides Resist All. "All" is not "Poison" - they don't even have any of the same letters. I don't know why this is complicated.
Treating Resist All as "Resist X and Resist Y and Resist Z" for all possible sets of A-Z produces results that do not match up with Resist All.
Then it is simple remove resist all completely because it resist "ALL" damage not Damage "X", "Y". or "Z"
Nope. I'll leave that one as an exercise for the reader, but I've got a hint: It's been covered, repeatedly, in detail, in this thread, with references.
Yes I know sometimes I misspell things, I usually try to catch them before posting but hey I am only human.
No worries. Everyone typos. That one's a common mistake that's not usually a typo, so I was pointing it out.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2010 - 9:43PM
#179
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2006
|
No. Resist All provides Resist All. "All" is not "Poison" - they don't even have any of the same letters. I don't know why this is complicated.
Treating Resist All as "Resist X and Resist Y and Resist Z" for all possible sets of A-Z produces results that do not match up with Resist All.
Then it is simple remove resist all completely because it resist "ALL" damage not Damage "X", "Y". or "Z"
Am I reading this right? You are saying they should remove resist all from the game? So you can win an argument? 
Deama wrote:
LordOfWeasels wrote:
First: "moot" point.
Second: "I can ignore X!" does not let you ignore Y, no matter what X and Y are, because X and Y are not the same, and this is D&D. Powers to EXACTLY what they say they do, nothing more, nothing less. "Resist All" is a Resistance, but it is not "resistance to poison". It stops poison damage because it stops ALL damage. It is not affected by things that affect poison resistance because it is not poison resistance.
Yes I know sometimes I misspell things, I usually try to catch them before posting but hey I am only human. I am not saying the something that bypasses Poison Resistance will bypass Cold as you seem to be insinuating I am I am saying that something that bypasses poison resistance will bypass anything and I mean ANYTHING that provides suce resistance.
Now think about this if Resist All is not resistance to "X" then it does not reduce damage to "X" plain and simple.
What then does Resist ALL do? It is a part of this game, and a relatively significant part of certain classes and builds.
Deama wrote:
@sharkpower: That is an oversight of the designers plain and simple, they make a mistake and people want to restrain everyone else.
Resistance being used interchangeably with Resist ____ isn't an oversight. It occurs more times in the game than just those two examples. I didn't want to flood my response with powers and feats, I thought two was enough to get the point accross.
No one is looking to restrain anything. This is the Rules Q&A forums where we discuss what the rules mean and how they interact with eachother in a complex game that we all enjoy. If you don't like a rule you can houserule it to change it at your table, but your interpretation of the rules here is invalidated pretty clearly by the wording used in powers as well as the section in the rules regarding Resist that includes uses of the word "resistance" right in it's text. It is not an oversight.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2010 - 9:46PM
#180
|
|
|
Note: There is a distinction between "Resistance to all damage" and "Resistance to all damage types." If there wasn't, then either A.) "Untyped" is a damage type (which is absurd and self-contradictory) or B.) Resist All does not allow you to resist untyped damage.
B is not the case. If you want to go with "untyped is a damage type" sure, but that's a pretty ballzy claim which needs a pretty significant proof to be accepted. One that won't beg the question by asserting that "Because otherwise Resist All wouldn't protect against it!"
|
|
|
