A number of monsters and henchmen do damage to you before and after combat and the damage type isn't specified. Is that damage combat or non-combat damage?
For example:
1) Enchantress (monster): Does 1 damage before the encounter and 1 damage after the encounter.
2) Blackfang (villain): Does damage before the encounter if you fail a check.
3) Poison trap (henchman): Does damage to all characters at the location if undefeated.
Is the damage assumed to be combat damage if it comes from a monster/henchman/villain? Or is the assumption that it's non-combat damage unless you fail the main check to defeat the bane?
All of those should have types, and in all cases they are not combat damage.
Before the encounter, the Enchanter deals 1 Force damage to you.
After the encounter, the Enchanter deals 1 Fire damage to you.
Before the encounter, each character at this locations must succeed at a Constitution or Fortitude 7 check or be dealt 1d4-1 Acid damage.
"If undefeated, discard the top card of your deck. Then, each character at this location must succeed at a Constitution or Fortitude 7 check or be dealt 1d4-1 Poison damage.
What printing/translation do you have of the game?
If you fail a check to defeat a monster (including villains and henchmen that are monsters) it deals combat damage to you in the amount of the difference between what you rolled and what the difficulty of the check was, unless the monster says it deals something other than combat damage.
The Ghost, for example, requires a Combat 12 or a Wisdom or Divine 8 check to defeat. No matter which one you decide to attempt, if you fail to defeat it you will be dealt combat damage. So if you attempt a Wisdom 8 check and roll a 6, you will take 2 combat damage.
Gogmurt requires a Combat 10 THEN a Combat 12 check to defeat. But he also says "All damage from Gogmurt is Fire damage." So if you roll an 8 for the Combat 10 check, you will take 2 Fire damage. This damage is not combat damage, so powers that reduce combat damage won't reduce it.
Any damage that isn't a result of failing a check to defeat a monster should tell you what kind of damage it is. If it says something other than combat, than it isn't combat damage.
You should take note too that Ranged Combat damage is Combat damage. You'll see that some armors reduce Combat damage, but also reduce Ranged Combat damage even more. So if you are dealt Ranged Combat damage, then you can use powers that reduce Combat damage.
Sorry, let me clarify, the (before and after encounter) damage was often typed, but not as combat or non-combat damage. I thoroughly read the rules and it never stated which damage type to assume. Obviously if the damage is coming from a barrier you can assume non-combat damage, but it's not as clear when coming from a monster/henchman/villain.
Does Gogmurt really work that way? I would assume since you failed a combat check that the damage would also be combat damage (with the fire trait).
Thanks for your response.
Ah. Ok. I understand. You don't assume either. If it says "Fire damage" it is "Fire damage" but it is not also combat damage. If it doesn't say "combat damage" then it isn't combat damage. (With the only exception being the checks to defeat a monster always result in damage. Unless the monster says otherwise, that damage is combat damage, even if it was a non-combat check to defeat the monster.)
When you are dealt damage, you and other players may play cards and use powers that reduce or otherwise affect the specific type of damage you’re being dealt. If you’re being dealt Fire damage, for example, you may play cards that reduce Fire damage, or cards that reduce all damage, but you may not play cards that reduce only Electricity or Combat damage. Each player may play no more than one of each card type to affect damage to the same character from the same source. If a card says it reduces damage, with no type listed, it reduces all types of damage.
Armor: Armor cards help you by reducing damage. Armor powers specify which types of damage they reduce; if a power refers to “all” damage, that applies to all damage of all types. If the armor doesn’t reduce the type of damage you’re being dealt, you can’t play it. For example, if you’re dealt Fire damage and the armor card doesn’t say it reduces Fire damage or all damage, you can’t play it.
And yes, that is how Gogmurt works. You can also check out this thread.
Ah. Ok. I understand. ...
To rephrase the 'as usual' perfect Hawk's answer, just remember three rules :
A) If one or more adjectives ("type") are used that's what it is and only that.
B) If different adjectives are used (e. g. Ranged + Combat, but why not Poison + Fire....), then all adjectives apply independently. So something that would work on any adjective would work EXCEPT if clearly stated it wouldn't work on another present adjective (e. g. non-Ranged Combat damage).
C) If NO adjective is present then it is a NO-type damage (and therefore not combat damage or anything else) EXCEPT when the damage comes from failing a check to defeat a MONSTER in which case it is Combat damage and only that.
Thanks for the clarification.