So even if a spell deals slashing, bludgeoning, or piercing damage, RAW it ignores DR. DR itself says this. If the spell does not ignore DR, then the spell itself must specifically say this. If there is errata, that is one thing, but the PF devs say some silly things quite regularly; and their FAQs have directly contradicted the rules in the past. Feel free to show me in the PRD something proving this so.Pathfinder FAQ: General Info - Spells & Damage. (Scroll down to "I cant [sic] help but notice ...") Also see Pellet Blast. Something that should be made more visible, to be sure. I imagine the "Spells ... ignore damage reduction" line was an oversight given that spells causing physical-typed damage are quite rare.
The FAQ is not RAW. It has directly contradicted RAW in the past. It's either nerf or nothing baby (errata or nothing in this case). :P
A FAQ is very simple to understand, but it is being misused in many cases. A "Frequently Asked Questions" is meant to clarify existing rules, not amend them, make up new ones, hate on monks, or any other purpose that it is often used for. Until the books themselves no longer say spells ignore DR, then spells will ignore DR.
7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.
I find that fascinating.
I'd also be inclined to let Paizo use the FAQ for whatever they think it should be used for, not what some forum poster who enjoys ignoring the intent of the rules now and then thinks.
7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.I find that fascinating.
I'd also be inclined to let Paizo use the FAQ for whatever they think it should be used for, not what some forum poster who enjoys ignoring the intent of the rules now and then thinks.
FAQs are frequently used, and their purpose is pretty clear. There's no need to muddy the waters; nor is there reason to talk down to people based on something so subjective as to interpreting what was "intended" in a game that's about 12 years old with a menagerie of different writers with their own agendas and flavors to things. FAQs are not RAW. Never have been, and likely never will be. You sure as heck won't open up your core rulebook and find FAQs telling you that monks are borked and half their archtypes won't function; I can tell you that.
In fact, open your core rulebook and tell me where it says that spells that deal piercing, slashing, or bludgeoning damage ignore damage reduction. You won't, because according to the core rules, they do not. However, the type of damage they do may very well be important to other mechanics beyond damage reduction. For example, there are oozes that multiply when you hit them with certain damage types; so manifesting the psionic power crystal swarm (which deals d4s of slashing damage) will end up causing those things to multiply; so the type of damage it does is relatively important.
Likewise, the type of damage it deals has an extreme effect on how a spell interacts with objects. For a RAW example, you cannot destroy a rope with a bludgeoning attack; so a druid could cast stone call all day long and never have to worry about breaking the ropes in the AoE because it doesn't work. Likewise, they are used as a gauge for GMs to gauge whether or not they are ineffective against certain things; because while they ignore DR, they do not ignore hardness or object traits.
I've got to say that I question the usefulness of having a FAQ. If the FAQ can be wrong with regards to the rules then it is not really that useful since no answer can really be trusted. If the FAQ is always right even if contradicting the rules then the FAQ is just stealth errata and should be called what it is.
The same problem cropped up at Wizards as well. The FAQ and even customer service were frequently wrong. The best it was, normally, was one of the devs kind of guessing at how they would rule it in their own games (much like Sean K. seems to do a lot), and then explaining that. At least the FAQ usually just made suggestions on how to rule stuff, which made it more of an advisory column and somewhat suitable as an FAQ ("how would you run this?") and never made itself out to be some sort of definitive thing (at least to my knowledge).
Currently, Paizo needs some motivators like this for monks. :P
Have the FAQ people ever said the FAQ was a definitive thing? Or did we, the online community, just assume as much?
:P
Have the FAQ people ever said the FAQ was a definitive thing? Or did we, the online community, just assume as much?
:P
Hm, I've never actually seen Paizo declare it definitive, so probably the latter? :)
|
Back to Sorcerer blasting for a sec please:
A cross-blooded Sorc can take Dragon/Elemental, the idea being that Elemental bloodline makes ALL the blasty goodness into the right one for the bonus +1 per die that Dragon gives...
Orc Bloodline pretty much just gives the +1 damage to ALL damage types.
The Wildblooded Primal line also gives +1 damage to spells with the energy descriptor like Dragon...but I believe that this takes the place of the ability to change energy descriptors.
So, the question is, other than going with 1 level Wiz for the Admixture school, is there a way to get the bonus to +2 damage per die rolled ala Dragon/Primal/Orc bloodlines, while still being able to swap the energy descriptor via Elemental bloodline? Or without using Elemental Metamagic rods/feat?
Also, am I correct that the Primal line couldn't be taken with a Crossblooded archetype?
bumpity bump bump bump.
|
|
bumpity bump bump bump.Back to Sorcerer blasting for a sec please:
A cross-blooded Sorc can take Dragon/Elemental, the idea being that Elemental bloodline makes ALL the blasty goodness into the right one for the bonus +1 per die that Dragon gives...
Orc Bloodline pretty much just gives the +1 damage to ALL damage types.
The Wildblooded Primal line also gives +1 damage to spells with the energy descriptor like Dragon...but I believe that this takes the place of the ability to change energy descriptors.
So, the question is, other than going with 1 level Wiz for the Admixture school, is there a way to get the bonus to +2 damage per die rolled ala Dragon/Primal/Orc bloodlines, while still being able to swap the energy descriptor via Elemental bloodline? Or without using Elemental Metamagic rods/feat?
Also, am I correct that the Primal line couldn't be taken with a Crossblooded archetype?
bamp.