alexdrfischer's page

The Raven Black wrote:

Nelzy wrote:

If they wanted Shield block to trigger before Resistance and Weakness they would have said so, or had another trigger on it.

They could have easily have it say

" Trigger While you have your shield raised, you are hit from a physical attack."

Cause if its before resistance there is no distinction on a hit and taking damage, since nothing can reduce the hit to 0 damage.

to me its clear that the devs want it to happen after resistance and weakness, and have prob balanced shields with that in mind.

Yes some instances might feel wierd that the hard bones on a skeleton helps the shield, but its also the other way around.
buff spells that give resistance would reasonably also protect your gear, but would in that case not since the shield would take damage before resistance.

but sometimes you have to paint with broad strokes else we would have gotten tons of special cases on how mutch damage a shield takes,
and this way they dont have to bother with resistance runes and material for shields.

So, if I hit with a sword a zombie (weakness Slashing 5) who can block with its shield, I will inflict 5 more damage to the shield than if I hit the zombie with a staff.

inb4 "um ackchually zombies can't use reactions"

but yes, that is fundamentally correct

I am guessing the designers of the game did NOT intend for shields to be easier to destroy than in the hands of a creature with weakness than one with resistances.

This is really why I want one to chime in.

Anyone have a line on Bonner, Bulmahn, R-M, or Seifter? (Sounds like a law-firm)

Out of curiosity, what are you trying to get out of this discussion? Like what's the end goal, what are you trying to enable or prevent from happening? A lot of this seems very semantic.

I am trying to understand if shields are stronger (harder to destroy) if weilded by a creature with resistances.

HammerJack wrote:

Yup, it seems really odd, but the resistance does come first.

Only block what you need. If you can catch some of the blow from the enemy's sword slash on your shoulder bone, then there is no need to get the shield involved as much. Save some time on repairs.

I suppose another point is that the shield block takes place the moment you are hit.

There a several instances where game designers, Jason Bulmahn in this case, ask the moment a player is hit if they want to shield block, not after step 3.

Granted, the characters do not have resistances, but the order is well before hit points are reduced (step 4).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTKfepicXiE&t=3597s

If the reduce hitpoint step is not the taking damage part, you technically never take damage, all other stages only deal with calculating the damage number.

Secondly Shield block specifies that you need to take damage, if it was the first thing that happened (before ress) it would not need to say that, and would just need to req a hit from a physical attack.

I understand your arguement. My question is, however, is TAKING DAMAGE the same as Reducing Hit Points.

It appears you can take damage, then mitigate taken damage to result in a loss of zero hit points.

Example: If a fireball hits a party and some people do not reduce their hitpoints (due to a criticial success or resistances) , does that mean the fireball does no damage, or does it mean some characters did not reduce the hit points?

This is my sticking point. Can a character TAKE DAMAGE that results in NO LOSS OF HITPOINTS.

Why does step 4 say REDUCE HIT POINTS instead of "Take Damage"

This discussion is in regards to the damage rolls on page 406 of Player Core.

I have seen arguments on both sides in regards to shield block, and when the damage is applied for creatures/characters that have resistances.

Example: A skeleton with a shield chooses to block a slashing strike.
The strike rolls 6 damage including bonuses.

Scenario 1: The shield (with a hardness of 5) blocks five damage. 1 point of damage goes to the shield's hit points, and 1 goes to the skeleton. Since the skeleton has a resistance 5 to slashing, the skeleton does not Reduce Hitpoints.

Scenario 2: The skeleton applies resistances first "Step 3" and the rest is applied to the shield block. Since the shield has a hardness of 5 the sheild and the skeleton both take zero damage.

Here is my quesion - Is "Reducing your hitpoints" the same as "taking damage"?

Those who favor scenario 2 say you don't take damage until step 4, but that is not what step 4 says. It states you do not REDUCE HIT POINTS until step 4.

In fact, according to step 3 (page 406 or player core) "Apply immunities, weaknesses, and resistances the subject has TO THE DAMAGE. So damage must have been taken, otherwise it can not be reduced.

Can someone official please put a pin in this ongoing debate. Is "taking damage" the same as "reducing hit points".

Specificly -
When does a shield take damage? Before or after step 3.