Razhen's page

My group has a question about the Shield Other spell. Sorry that this is long winded and fairly analytical, but we've been talking about it for a little bit now and there is a lot I can add here for better context.

There are two interpretations of how damage is supposed to be applied and we can't come to an agreement on how this is supposed to work.

Group 1:
Target is hit for 10 slashing damage
Target has resistance 2 slashing
Target takes 8 slashing damage
This damage is split with Shield Other, so both the target and caster suffer 4 slashing damage.

Group 2:
Target is hit for 10 slashing damage
Shield Other is applied at this step, and both the target and caster suffer 5 damage.
Target has resistance 2 slashing
Target suffers 3 slashing damage, caster suffers 5.

Basically, one group believes Shield Other triggers before the target takes damage and the other group believes it triggers after the target takes damage.

Looking at the damage application process:
1. Roll damage, add bonuses/penalties (this is where Group 2 says it triggers)
2. Determine damage type
3. Apply immunities, weaknesses, and resistances
4. If any remains, reduce targets Hit Points by that amount. (this is where Group 1 says it triggers)

Argument for Group 2 - Shield Other is a penalty for the damage and is split at this point, then the target applies resistances. The caster takes untyped/unspecified damage. The spell clarifies that resistances don't apply.

Arguments for Group 1 - Group 2's explanation doesn't make sense, because no damage type has been applied and there is no such thing as unspecified damage. Looking at the damage application process, no damage has been applied to the target until step 4 and Shield Other triggers after the target takes damage.

The reason for the line of text saying resistances don't apply is talking specifically about the caster. The reason being, you can't double up on a bonus, for example, having the target and caster both apply resistance 5 fire.

Also, if we followed what Group 1 was saying, this instance wouldn't make sense:

Target is hit by a dragons breath and takes 30 fire damage
Target is immune to fire damage
Shield Other splits, caster ends up taking 15 fire damage

Thematically that doesn't make sense, since no damage should have ever been applied to the target to begin with.

We've been talking about this for a bit and haven't been able to come to an agreement. We spent some time looking online and haven't found any similar question asked, sorry if this is a repeated question.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, thanks again.

You are both very welcome and I'm glad to have been able to help. Enjoy the Con!

You can 5' step straight ahead into the room, but you can not 5' step around a hard corner into the room...the diagram isn't really clear where you're wanting to step to.

EDIT: Ninja'd much more clearly by Hendelbolaf...

Sniggevert and Hendelbolaf are correct, you cannot take a diagonal 5ft step through a wall. However, if the wall were a hole in the ground, you could take a 5ft step over that

I had to look it up because your answer made sense to me Gauss... but at the same time it didn't seem logical. This is taken from the Casting a Spell on the srd:

"Cast a Spell

...

You only provoke attacks of opportunity when you begin casting a spell, even though you might continue casting for at least 1 full round. While casting a spell, you don't threaten any squares around you.

This action is otherwise identical to the cast a spell action described under Standard Actions."

So, no, you are not threatening while you are casting a spell, therefore you do not even get the option of taking the AoO.

So say I have reach and I'm casting Summon I and someone comes through a threatened square, what happens?

No AoO as full round casting "consumes all your actions that round."
AoO are a no action so you can make them while casting a full round action.
Sacrifice the spell to take an AoO.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I would rule that no, you can't take that AoO. You are casting a spell, not wielding your weapon. Sure, you may still be holding your weapon, but in order to gain an AoO you must be threatening with it and you cannot threaten while you are casting.

Yes I know this, but it does not answer the question: does dim lighting provide any concealment against an opponent with low-light vision.

See my edit above. If a Human was standing right next to said Elf, he could only see 20 feet as normal lighting and the next 20 feet as dim lighting, 40 feet total.

Now, picture a goblin 60 feet away. The goblin has concealment against both the Elf and Human. If the goblin moves up 30 feet and is now 30 feet away, the same goblin is going to have concealment against the Human, BUT he will be within the Elf's "normal light" vision, thus he won't have concealment.

Jeraa is right. Here are the rules for Vision and Light Sources:
Vision and Light

"Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters."

Also, the Light Sources and Illumination table part way down the page shows you the numbers for low-light vision

Edit: Didn't fully answer your question. Basically, if an Elf is holding a torch he has normal light for the first 40 feet and dim light for the next 40 feet, being able to see 80 feet away. Anything within the last 40 feet has concealment as normal.