This has come up twice now at our table, and I'm wondering if there are rules that could guide us. We have a goblin rogue with the roll with it feat. Let's say he is hit by a slam attack with a free grab attempt on a hit. He makes his Acrobatics check to roll with it and avoid damage, but does he automatically avoid the grab or is he still subject to the grab attempt?
Similarly, if he avoids damage on an attack that can poison, does he need to make a Fortitude save vs the poison or is he safe from the poison as well?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No damage = no riders.
No damage = no riders.
Is there a rule I can reference to support this?
Another bit of rules text that demonstrates the principle:
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.
AFAIK, there's no explicit rule generalizing this to all situations in which damage is reduced or prevented, but the principle is certainly present. If you don't cut someone, your injection poison won't work. If you knock someone twenty feet out of reach, it's kinda hard to grab them.
Thank you both. Helpful stuff.
|
I think we will need to look the feat first:
Roll With It (Combat)
Source Goblins of Golarion pg. 25
You know how to take a hit, even if your reaction sends you bouncing and flying out of battle while shrieking at the top of your lungs.Prerequisites: Goblin, Acrobatics 1 rank.
Benefit: If you are struck by a melee weapon you can try to convert some or all of that damage into movement that sends you off in an uncontrolled bouncing roll. To do so, you must make an Acrobatics check (DC = 5 + the damage dealt from the attack) as an immediate action. If you succeed in this check, you take no damage from the actual attack but instead convert that damage into movement with each point equating to 1 foot of movement. For example, if you would have taken 6 points of damage, you would convert that into 6 feet of movement. You immediately move in a straight line in a direction of your choice this number of feet (rounded up to the nearest 5-foot-square), halting if you reach a distance equal to your actual speed. If this movement would make you strike an object or creature of your size or larger, the movement immediately ends, you take 1d4 points of damage, and fall prone in that square. This involuntary movement provokes attacks of opportunity normally if you move through threatened squares, but does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the creature that struck you in the first place.
You don't outright negate the damage, nor deflect the attack, you receive it but convert it into movement, so I feel that most rider effects will work.
But we should look grab, too:
Grab (Ex)
Source Bestiary 6 pg. 294, Pathfinder RPG Bestiary pg. 301, Bestiary 2 pg. 297, Bestiary 3 pg. 295, Bestiary 4 pg. 295, Bestiary 5 pg. 294
If the creature hits with the indicated attack, it deals the normal amount of damage and tries to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity.
As I see it, the attacker deals the damage (no action that is the effect of hitting) and then start a free action to grab the target.
The target has an immediate action that is the consequence of receiving the damage.So we have the same trigger (dealing/receiving the damage) for two actions without a clear hierarchy rule on how they should be resolved.
At that point, I will fall back to RL logic. If my action pushes you away out of my reach, I can't grab you at the same time.
So I would rule that the first thing that will happen is that the goblin uses Roll with it and move as appropriate. Then, if he is still within the reach of the attacker the grab attempt is resolved. If not, he avoids it.
|
|
"If you succeed in this check, you take no damage from the actual attack but instead convert that damage into movement with each point equating to 1 foot of movement. "
No damage = no riders.
I don't see how that's any different from damage reduction. You take no damage from the actual attack is all you need to know.
Depend on the rider.
If your DR reduces my shocking sword slashing damage to 0 you still get the d6 of electrical damage.If the rider is an injury poison it doesn't work.
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.
If the creature hits with the indicated attack, it deals the normal amount of damage and tries to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity.
Read the text of grab. What is required is hitting, not delivering a specific amount of damage.
When you hit you:
1) deliver the normal amount of damage;
and
2) tries to start a grapple.
Two separate things, you don't need to be successful at one to do the other.
So just to check Diego if I'm holding the charge and hit but that hit does no damage (for what ever reason) I still apply the spell to the attack under your reading?
|
|
So just to check Diego if I'm holding the charge and hit but that hit does no damage (for what ever reason) I still apply the spell to the attack under your reading?
You mean, if you hit with a punch but you are unable to damage the target with it? Sure, as long as the spell doesn't simply increase your punch damage and was already factored in that.
If the attack was deflected it would be different, but in the example you made you have hit for no damage.
Very similar to what happens when you touch someone and deliver a touch spell.
Do you damage him/it? No. Do you touch him/it? Yes.
It is simply harder than a touch attack as you are trying to connect with force.
To make a concrete example, if you have cast Chill touch, are holding the charge and punch someone immune to nonlethal damage, he/it will still take the 1d6 of negative energy damage and swill have to save not to lose a point of strength.
Instead, if you were delivering a sneak attack using your fist on someone immune to nonlethal damage, he/it will not take any damage at all, as the sneak attack damage is added directly to the punch damage and is nonlethal damage.