Applying DR and overcoming it.


Rules Questions

Sovereign Court

This has been asked 100 times I'm sure, but:

When a creature has DR, does the DR apply to every single hit made by every character throughout the entire round?

My group plays it to where the DR is like an minimum threshold that has to be met just once, then all damage rolls to the creature. I can't find anything in the core or PRD to back this up, though.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

DR applies to each attack.

You are right, your fellow players are wrong.


Every physical hit, it applies or source of physical damage. Some spell like ice storm do physical and elemental damage. Also you can do some searching on here but vicious weapon property is also absorbed by dr. Some feats allow it to function the other way. I know there is an archery one but I don’t know the name.

Spell like magic missile and fire ball don't use dr they use energy resistance for reduction. Just want to note that I have played with few dms that used to apply dr even to stuff like that.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Clustered Shots is the Archery Feat.

Sczarni

Yes, just point your fellow players to the Clustered Shots feat. Why would there exist such a feat if DR only worked once/round?


Yep, DR applies against every single physical attack from every source, unless the attack is of the correct type to bypass the DR.

Silver Crusade

Damage Reduction in CRB glossary of PRD

Notice the many reference to 'attacks' and 'an attack'. DR applies to each attack that doesn't overcome it on its own.

prd wrote:
The numerical part of a creature's damage reduction (or DR) is the amount of damage the creature ignores from normal attacks. Usually, a certain type of weapon can overcome this reduction (see Overcoming DR). This information is separated from the damage reduction number by a slash. For example, DR 5/magic means that a creature takes 5 less points of damage from all weapons that are not magic. If a dash follows the slash, then the damage reduction is effective against any attack that does not ignore damage reduction.


Can you show where vicious is absorbed by dr? Afaik vicious is untyped 2d6.

Sczarni

There is a Pathfinder Society scenario where the BBEG has DR (I think from being a Barbarian?), and in his notes it specifies that his DR prevents him from being damaged by his own Vicious weapon.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The 2d6 damage done by vicious is flagged as "extra" against the target. So it will be the same type that the weapon does, just like a sneak attack. However the 1d6 to the wielder is untyped, and should bypass DR.


it is in Eyes of the Ten, part III : Red Revolution scenario as one of the tactics for an invulnerable rager.
cut and paste the line out the adventure.
"greataxe has the vicious property on it, but that his damage
reduction prevents any of the return damage the +2 vicious
greataxe would deal back to him."


I'm not sure what you mean by "flagged", but untyped damage from an attach would not bypass DR. Quite the opposite; it would never bypass DR. However, vicious damage is not untyped:

Vicious wrote:

This special ability can only be placed on melee weapons.

When a vicious weapon strikes an opponent, it creates a flash of disruptive energy that resonates between the opponent and the wielder. This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage to the opponent and 1d6 points of damage to the wielder.

Since the extra damage is dealt by "energy", DR should not apply, as energy damage bypasses DR. I would rule this way both for the opponent and the wielder.

So I'd say that the scenario is wrong.


I think energy is fluffy txt to give flavor explain damage. I personally would go with the scenario as it is an actual example of published use of the ability and it is scenario for organized play. until one of the devs say other wise, FAQ or a new adventure printing of adventure show it being used differently.

Sczarni

It's the only example I'm aware of.


I believe that bleed ignores DR, but otherwise it's every single attack. Found that out the hard way when I tossed a demon into a pit full of spikes that each did 1d6 damage and he ignored the entire damage! That was the eye opener for me.


As a side note, energy resistance in 3.0 worked on a per-round basis: the first X points of damage of a particular energy type dealt in a round was ignored. So if you fought a creature with electricity resistance 30 and fire resistance 30 (multiple high resistances are fairly common on high-level outsiders), your party would be much better off throwing two lightning bolts at it than a lightning bolt and a fireball.


Going based on the scenario guys, I'm pretty sure Vicious goes through DR. It says in the rules that the damage that is dealt to the user cannot be negated in any way. The above is a specific scenario example where it doesn't work.

Scarab Sages

KainPen wrote:
I think energy is fluffy txt to give flavor explain damage. I personally would go with the scenario as it is an actual example of published use of the ability and it is scenario for organized play. until one of the devs say other wise, FAQ or a new adventure printing of adventure show it being used differently.

Although one might think example is a good (should be the best) way to show how rules are intended to be used, I have found it just as probable the author used (changed) the rule to fit a particular need/desire, or applied some "special" situation to modify it.

Ninja'd by SwiftyKun!


there are no rules say that the damage cannot be negated. it says nothing of the sort. blahpers quoted what vicious says it does. All it says that support the idea that think it goes through dr, is that it release of energy does the damage. thus it must be energy damage thus needing energy resistance. Which there is always a type, weather it be fire, force, cold, acid, electricity, positive, negative. Vicious is untyped making it either fluffy txt that it is actual energy or it becomes typed by what ever weapon is being used, much like sneak attack and scorching ray. sneak attack become fire damage, or weapon specialization ray the +2 damage is untyped and become the same type of what every ray spell is cast.

in the case in the scenario it is being used a slashing weapon so the damage type become slashing, which is reduced by DR. the scenario is actual in game use for "official organized play" example. It shows it is functioning in this way or suggestion that it is not energy damage at all that the words energy in this is fluff txt. It is not like it is some 3rd party product. There is a precedent already in place on how untyped damage works. other wise sneak attack, and weapon specialization would either always go through DR or ER.

I challenge anyone to find another example of it not working with dr in official aspect, or a dev response that says other wise. Even try to get it faq if you can. I believe this is the only example thus it is the ruling that should be used. other wise it is a house rule.

Honestly when you read it should more then likely be force energy type.
it should be changed to such.

Sczarni

It was negative energy, iirc, in 3.5. Not sure why Pathfinder removed the descriptor (although it would quickly become the enchantment of choice for Dhampirs everywhere if it was).


I don't consider a scenario a "ruling", KainPen. They have errors all the time.

I'm certainly open to a FAQ if someone is interested enough to start one, but I'm not interested in a "prove me wrong" war.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I was going to start a separate thread but this is close enough.

How about DR/- and attack like a paladin's smite that bypasses DR? Would a smite get past that? I think that I've seen differences of opinions about this.


I personally think Vicious would be overpowered if it were that easy to mitigate or ignore it. It's an insidious magic device; I see it as an untyped backlash.


Quote:

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

+

I was going to start a separate thread but this is close enough.

How about DR/- and attack like a paladin's smite that bypasses DR? Would a smite get past that? I think that I've seen differences of opinions about this.

I have no idea what the official line is, but I would probably choose to rule that it does not. I would say "if the DR can be bypassed, smite bypasses it."

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Bizbag wrote:
Quote:

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

+

I was going to start a separate thread but this is close enough.

How about DR/- and attack like a paladin's smite that bypasses DR? Would a smite get past that? I think that I've seen differences of opinions about this.

I have no idea what the official line is, but I would probably choose to rule that it does not. I would say "if the DR can be bypassed, smite bypasses it."

Which is not at all what Smite says.

CRB wrote:
smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess


Bizbag wrote:
I personally think Vicious would be overpowered if it were that easy to mitigate or ignore it. It's an insidious magic device; I see it as an untyped backlash.

I don't think it would over powerd because what is good for the goose is good for the gander and it fall right in the same place as other weapon enchantments. They lose their effectiveness as you level. Because dr would apply to the 2d6 extra that is done. At the early levels it is very strong but at later levels it is nothing. What maybe 2-12 points of damage to what you attack. If that has dr/- it is reduced same as wielder. Dr 3/- gets it to 0 to 9 averages 3 points of damage.

The problem is it is untyped. untyped becomes the same type as what is causing the damage, if it is fire untyped becomes fire, if it negative energy is becomes that, if it is slashing it becomes slashing, which is physical damage which DR. effects. All Dr works on the effect but magic works on it as the weapon is already magical.

In this case it comes when it is on a weapon it becomes piercing ect. This the rules on untyped damage as I stated earlier they don’t suddenly change for vicious. Now if you have a flaming weapon, you could argue vicious becomes fire damage instead piercing, ect. As the untyped energy damage that is listed. Following the rules of untyped damage should become another form of energy before physical type. Which may make for some useful effects and it would simulate the 3d6 energy epic level weapon powers in 3.5. even this would not be super powerful as it is subject to ER.

Dark Archive

KainPen wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
I personally think Vicious would be overpowered if it were that easy to mitigate or ignore it. It's an insidious magic device; I see it as an untyped backlash.

I don't think it would over powerd because what is good for the goose is good for the gander and it fall right in the same place as other weapon enchantments. They lose their effectiveness as you level. Because dr would apply to the 2d6 extra that is done. At the early levels it is very strong but at later levels it is nothing. What maybe 2-12 points of damage to what you attack. If that has dr/- it is reduced same as wielder. Dr 3/- gets it to 0 to 9 averages 3 points of damage.

The problem is it is untyped. untyped becomes the same type as what is causing the damage, if it is fire untyped becomes fire, if it negative energy is becomes that, if it is slashing it becomes slashing, which is physical damage which DR. effects. All Dr works on the effect but magic works on it as the weapon is already magical.

In this case it comes when it is on a weapon it becomes piercing ect. This the rules on untyped damage as I stated earlier they don’t suddenly change for vicious. Now if you have a flaming weapon, you could argue vicious becomes fire damage instead piercing, ect. As the untyped energy damage that is listed. Following the rules of untyped damage should become another form of energy before physical type. Which may make for some useful effects and it would simulate the 3d6 energy epic level weapon powers in 3.5. even this would not be super powerful as it is subject to ER.

So, what type of damage does Vampiric Touch?

Quote:
You must succeed on a melee touch attack. Your touch deals 1d6 points of damage per two caster levels (maximum 10d6). You gain temporary hit points equal to the damage you deal. You can't gain more than the subject's current hit points + the subject's Constitution score (which is enough to kill the subject). The temporary hit points disappear 1 hour later.

Since, per you, untyped does the same damage as what is causing it, it is 1d6 "touch" damage per caster level?


Should be negative energy as it is necromancy spell. but it does not state it like the other touch attack necromancy spells. Thus it remains a untyped. As a touch attack has no type. Touch attack specifically called out to ignore DR along with any effect they yield.

Same goes if you sneak attack with Vampiric touch all the damage stays untyped and ignores dr.

Dark Archive

KainPen wrote:

Should be negative energy as it is necromancy spell. but it does not state it like the other touch attack necromancy spells. Thus it remains a untyped. As a touch attack has no type. Touch attack specifically called out to ignore DR along with any effect they yield.

Same goes if you sneak attack with Vampiric touch all the damage stays untyped and ignores dr.

Can you point me to the rule where touch attacks are called out to bypass DR? I am curious as to how they interact with the ranged touch attacks of firearms.


Magic bypasses DR -- it's not a 'normal' attack.

Damage Reduction

Quote:

Whenever damage reduction completely negates the damage from an attack, it also negates most special effects that accompany the attack, such as injury poison, a monk's stunning, and injury-based disease. Damage Reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. Nor does it affect poisons or diseases delivered by inhalation, ingestion, or contact.

Attacks that deal no damage because of the target's damage reduction do not disrupt spells.

However:

Quote:
Early Firearms: When firing an early firearm, the attack resolves against the target’s touch AC when the target is within the first range increment of the weapon, but this type of attack is not considered a touch attack for the purposes of feats and abilities such as Deadly Aim. At higher range increments, the attack resolves normally, including taking the normal cumulative –2 penalty for each full range increment. Unlike other projectile weapons, early firearms have a maximum range of five range increments.

I would argue that means it's not a touch attack for damage reduction.

Dark Archive

Abraham spalding wrote:

Magic bypasses DR -- it's not a 'normal' attack.

Damage Reduction

Quote:

Whenever damage reduction completely negates the damage from an attack, it also negates most special effects that accompany the attack, such as injury poison, a monk's stunning, and injury-based disease. Damage Reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. Nor does it affect poisons or diseases delivered by inhalation, ingestion, or contact.

Attacks that deal no damage because of the target's damage reduction do not disrupt spells.

However:

Quote:
Early Firearms: When firing an early firearm, the attack resolves against the target’s touch AC when the target is within the first range increment of the weapon, but this type of attack is not considered a touch attack for the purposes of feats and abilities such as Deadly Aim. At higher range increments, the attack resolves normally, including taking the normal cumulative –2 penalty for each full range increment. Unlike other projectile weapons, early firearms have a maximum range of five range increments.
I would argue that means it's not a touch attack for damage reduction.

Thanks for pointing that out, not sure how I missed that line in DR.

and wow, that is a cross-refference and RAI hell to figure out, I could see that easily missed by many new gamers.


Could someone here please quote where it was stated that untyped bonus damage reverts to whatever damage type the original damage came from?

Sorry for being skeptical, but having something called "untyped DR" which works against anything sounds a little fishy instead of saying "It's bonus DR which applies to the original type of DR for that creature". I can't recall reading anywhere where it says untyped DR stops everything as well, barring things like magical or energy damage types. It just feels like there's a lot of assuming when it comes to Untyped DR or Untyped bonus damage.

Sczarni

It's always listed in the effect.

If something gives "+2 fire damage", it's fire damage.

If something gives "+1d6 cold damage", it's cold damage.

If something gives "+2 damage", it's whatever type of damage you're adding the +2 to.

Same with extra dice. If something gives "+1d6 damage", it's whatever type of damage you're adding the 1d6 to.


Nefreet wrote:

It's always listed in the effect.

If something gives "+2 fire damage", it's fire damage.

If something gives "+1d6 cold damage", it's cold damage.

If something gives "+2 damage", it's whatever type of damage you're adding the +2 to.

Same with extra dice. If something gives "+1d6 damage", it's whatever type of damage you're adding the 1d6 to.

You'd figure something that "Creates a resonating magical field of uncontrolled energy that creates a miniature explosion between you and the target hit" would do something else than just "extra slashing damage". :/

I can see it being "magically enhanced to deal extra MUNDANE damage" but I can't see it being enchanted to deal the damage type of the weapon..

Edit: This may be for a different thread, but when do I multiply the magically enchanted extra damage on a critical hit? Some enchantments say they do, some say they don't, and others don't say anything at all.

Sczarni

Vicious presents us with a different argument, though.

People that read the reference to "energy" as fluff text believe the extra dice of damage are whatever type of damage the weapon was dealing to begin with (slashing/piercing/whatever), while those that read the reference to "energy" as crunch text believe the extra dice of damage is untyped energy damage, which would not be subject to DR.

Given the Eyes of the Ten precedent, I believe it is whatever type of damage the weapon is dealing. Others disagree, but they have nothing to reference for their debate.


Nefreet wrote:

Vicious presents us with a different argument, though.

People that read the reference to "energy" as fluff text believe the extra dice of damage are whatever type of damage the weapon was dealing to begin with (slashing/piercing/whatever), while those that read the reference to "energy" as crunch text believe the extra dice of damage is untyped energy damage, which would not be subject to DR.

Given the Eyes of the Ten precedent, I believe it is whatever type of damage the weapon is dealing. Others disagree, but they have nothing to reference for their debate.

I agree that this is confusing. For this kind of argument I'd like to reference the rope dart weapon which is classified as a thrown weapon with a range increment of 10? I believe. However, the fluff text of the weapon specifically prohibits the weapon from being thrown a certain distance without being able to be retracted. I don't believe it's out of the question to say "If you take the fluff text of one thing literally, you MUST take the fluff text of ALL things literally to be fair."

This of course would be an argument for another thread though.

Sczarni

Pathfinder has a habit of combining fluff text in the same paragraph as crunch text. The Bastard Sword is an infamous example.

Sczarni

SwiftyKun wrote:
Edit: This may be for a different thread, but when do I multiply the magically enchanted extra damage on a critical hit? Some enchantments say they do, some say they don't, and others don't say anything at all.

Extra dice are never multiplied on a critical hit, while most other flat damage bonuses usually are (unless called out otherwise, like some trait bonuses).

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Applying DR and overcoming it. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.