poundpuppy30 |
I understand that if a rogue who has the talent (bleeding attack) can add a bleeding affect on a victim equal to the number of d6 they use for their sneak attack. For instance a 4d6 sneak attack gives 4 bleed to victim. My question is if the rogue hits the same victim with several sneak attacks does each one add a bleed affect or in the book does this fall under stacking of bleeding and not it's not allowed, because I would think each sneak attack would add bleeding since its a seperate wound or am I wrong?
BigNorseWolf |
I understand that if a rogue who has the talent (bleeding attack) can add a bleeding affect on a victim equal to the number of d6 they use for their sneak attack. For instance a 4d6 sneak attack gives 4 bleed to victim. My question is if the rogue hits the same victim with several sneak attacks does each one add a bleed affect or in the book does this fall under stacking of bleeding and not it's not allowed, because I would think each sneak attack would add bleeding since its a seperate wound or am I wrong?
1) Thats a rules question not a PFS question so brace for impact capin and be ready to move forums.
2) A creature that is taking bleed damage takes the listed amount of damage at the beginning of its turn. Bleeding can be stopped by a DC 15 Heal check or through the application of any spell that cures hit point damage (even if the bleed is ability damage). Some bleed effects cause ability damage or even ability drain.[i] Bleed effects do not stack with each other unless they deal different kinds of damage
. When two or more bleed effects deal the same kind of damage, take the worse effect. In this case, ability drain is worse than ability damage.
Both of your bleeds are dealing hit point damage, so they don't stack.
Silbeg |
One thing to remember is that Pathfinder is still a game, and as such they need to be able to craft the rules to allow some sort of balance between abilities.
If you could stack the bleeds, it would be incredibly powerful, possibly eclipsing other methods of dealing damage. You'd start seeing people posting around here that if you aren't playing a rogue with bleeding attack you are playing wrong.
As is it is, bleeding attacks are still pretty potent, just not game breakers. You are still getting your sneak attack, and the bleed bypasses DR of all types. So, still effective!
BTW:
Bleeding damage from this ability does not stack with itself. Bleeding damage bypasses any damage reduction the creature might possess
It is right in the rule for Bleeding Attack.
Tim Vincent |
BTW:
prd wrote:Bleeding damage from this ability does not stack with itself. Bleeding damage bypasses any damage reduction the creature might possessIt is right in the rule for Bleeding Attack.
Who would have guessed that it'd be helpful to read the description of the Rogue Talent you were thinking of taking before asking questions?
Me. I would have guessed that.
Kayerloth |
One thing to remember is that Pathfinder is still a game, and as such they need to be able to craft the rules to allow some sort of balance between abilities.
If you could stack the bleeds, it would be incredibly powerful, possibly eclipsing other methods of dealing damage. You'd start seeing people posting around here that if you aren't playing a rogue with bleeding attack you are playing wrong.
As is it is, bleeding attacks are still pretty potent, just not game breakers. You are still getting your sneak attack, and the bleed bypasses DR of all types. So, still effective!
BTW:
prd wrote:Bleeding damage from this ability does not stack with itself. Bleeding damage bypasses any damage reduction the creature might possessIt is right in the rule for Bleeding Attack.
Yep one of the nastier things I've seen (in 3.5) was an Epic level Rogue build with Supreme Two Weapon Fighting (8 attacks per round - 4 from each hand) wielding a pair of wounding daggers. Some seriously ugly amounts of damage when you added the effects of the Con damage on top of his sneak.