Though it doesn't mention it, would Stoneskin prevent Precision Damage, such as Sneak Attack? Personally, I say no. But I have a player who's curious.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Though it doesn't mention it, would Stoneskin prevent Precision Damage, such as Sneak Attack? Personally, I say no. But I have a player who's curious.
Spells do what they say they do.
Stoneskin is a form of DR. It doesn't negate sneak attacks the way concealment does, it just makes it harder to damage. You don't need a cold iron weapon to sneak attack fey creatures, for instance.
That's what I thought. But this player is the kind that wants multiple sources of verification on some things. (rolls eyes in exasperation). Thanks, ya'll.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's what I thought. But this player is the kind that wants multiple sources of verification on some things. (rolls eyes in exasperation). Thanks, ya'll.
You're the GM. If you want stoneskin to protect against precision damage, then it does, and it doesn't matter what the rules say.
If you don't want stoneskin to protect against precision damage, then it doesn't, and it doesn't matter what the rules say.
If he wants a second source to verify against, read him the two paragraphs above. If he wants a third, or fourth, read him additional copies. <shrug>
LOL.. I'll do that.
I don't have a problem with the spell and the it's lack of protection against precision damage. I just wanted back up on what I told the player.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The information about stoneskin stopping precision damage is listed right after the part about how it increases natural armor, and right before the bonus to fort saves is described.
A change of subject, but d20pfsrd.com is in transition to its new web home and I need it for the game tonight. It speeds things up so much more than looking up rules in the books by using the page.
grumble grumble grumble.
But, I know John is doing what's best for his users and the site, so my grumbling isn't serious.
A change of subject, but d20pfsrd.com is in transition to its new web home and I need it for the game tonight. It speeds things up so much more than looking up rules in the books by using the page.
grumble grumble grumble.
But, I know John is doing what's best for his users and the site, so my grumbling isn't serious.
Can you get what you need from Archives of Nethys?
D'oh! I always forget about that site. Yes, I can! Thanks!
AFAIK, Stoneskin would not prevent precision damage, it would absorb the weapon damage, and if that damage is not comoetely soaked through,, then the precision damage would be annulled. So if any of the basic weapon damage bleeds through, the precison damage also deos.
There's also the school of thought that all damage gets lumped together and then Stoneskin absorbs what it can.
Sneak attack and other precision damage types are not riders that require the base attack to do damage to be effective, they are bonuses to the damage of the attack. Requiring the base attack to penetrate DR before applying precison damage is as wrong as requiring base to penetrate before applying strength bonus damage.
It's worth noting that if you can cast stoneskin, you can likely cast blur, displacement, or mirror image, which all help against precision damage by negating attacks entirely. Mathematically, those spells are superior if you expect to get very hard. If you expect to get hit often but not so hard, stoneskin is better.
|
Sneak attack and other precision damage types are not riders that require the base attack to do damage to be effective, they are bonuses to the damage of the attack. Requiring the base attack to penetrate DR before applying precison damage is as wrong as requiring base to penetrate before applying strength bonus damage.
And HERE is the post from Jason Bulmahn to that effect.
DR does not negate sneak attack damage. The sneak attack damage is not a special effect that accompanies the attack, it is part of the damage roll.
Hope that clears it up.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing