| 14 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
In the game i am currently playing i have a level 6 invulnerable rager with the guarded Life rage power.
However i am trying to figure out how the bit about invulnerable rager geting double Dr vs non lethal damage works with this power. The reason being that by the time the damage is applied my DR was already applied.
So for this example we'll say my level 6 Barb with d3 is at 9 hps and is hit for 13 damage. 3 damage is removed and this leaves the char at -1. thn Guarded life kicks in and 6 of that damage is converted to non lethal.
Does the Dr apply to the non lethal damage when its converted? In which case due to invulnerable rager all 6 NL damage will get ignored. Or does all of it go through becase it was 'converted' and the Dr was already applied for the initial hit?
Agreed.
DR does not apply in this case at all. If you look at the rules for DR you will see that they clearly state DR only effects damage coming from ATTACKS and/or WEAPONS. Things like losing your constitution bonus from ending your rage or from falling off a cliff do not constitute as attacks and therefore bypass DR entirely.
DR does not apply in this case at all. If you look at the rules for DR you will see that they clearly state DR only effects damage coming from ATTACKS and/or WEAPONS. Things like losing your constitution bonus from ending your rage or from falling off a cliff do not constitute as attacks and therefore bypass DR entirely.
Wut?
He's talking about an ability that lets you make a save to halve the damage from an ATTACK and have the remaining amount do nonlethal.
@the OP. I asked this a while ago. Double dipping on DR is a nono. Personally, since I don't think there's a specific order of operations in this scenario, I'd give the player a choice. Either have DR apply (thus reducing the DC of the fort save) or risk failing the fort save to have the remainder apply to a doubled DR.
Ask your DM. I'm sorry I don't have a more difinitive answer for you.
|
Wut?
He's talking about an ability that lets you make a save to halve the damage from an ATTACK and have the remaining amount do nonlethal.
I agree that this is the kind of damage that DR could fix if it weren't for the order of operations.
@the OP. I asked this a while ago. Double dipping on DR is a nono. Personally, since I don't think there's a specific order of operations in this scenario, I'd give the player a choice. Either have DR apply (thus reducing the DC of the fort save) or risk failing the fort save to have the remainder apply to a doubled DR.
I might allow this also but I'd worry about the precedent begun by allowing people to play with order of operations too much.
I would not apply the DR again vs the new non-lethal damage. You already applied it once.
This, the attack was made and the DR did its job by negating some of the damage. Your ability then played with the damage that made it through. Even though you are taking damage of a non lethal type it isn't another "attack" on you that the DR can negate, it is the damage that made it through the initial attack.
The over all general consensus is what I figured was the case. Allowing bothe would ave given me effectively dr 8 while at low health which is a bit strong. Though I was mainly interested since allowing the dr vs the non lethal damage would have prevented unconsciousness.
Any thank you everyone for your answers.
I quite like this power, vs monsters with alotbof attacks it's probably saved ,y characters life several times, and with raging vitality the barbarian stays raging so it mostly works.
This seems like a great thread to hit the FAQ button on.
|
|
The over all general consensus is what I figured was the case. Allowing bothe would ave given me effectively dr 8 while at low health which is a bit strong. Though I was mainly interested since allowing the dr vs the non lethal damage would have prevented unconsciousness.
On the bright side, the Invulnerable Rager will have DR 8/- eventually all the time =)
Necro,
I am running into the same problem. I disagree when the damage is converted to non lethal it counts agianst my dr/lethal i am not applying the dr twice the damage is being converted therefore aplied seperatly to a second circumstance where i have dr. any way I hope we cna hit the faq because it is just what a invundrable rage is supposed to do
my thread we are discussing the same thing here: it seems like a legitamate use of guarded life has there been any developer rulings on it?
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pri5?Help-me-flesh-out-my-UnKillable-Barbarian #1
I am confused say I am using all my damage reduction from Stalwart I take I have dr 18/- I have 20 hp left. I take 50 damage from a longsword applied against my dr 18/-
that is 32 damage left I then start to "die" then 22 damage of that is converted to non lethal which applies against my DR/26 non lethal. then i in reality only take 10 damage and am only down to 10 HPs left. correct?
my HP math may be off but you get the idea.
here is my take on it.
lets all hit the faq unless it has been answered
This is why I wanted to initially convert the damage to nonlethal first, and then pit it against DR. Lethal would go against DR 18/- and the nonlethal against DR 26/lethal for a combined result of 40 damage stopped.
The way Lobolusk say it above may be closer to the RAW rather than my initial understanding, but the end result would still be the same in either case.
To throw a wrench into this, I want to point out that the DR/Lethal isn't actually a separate DR. The Rager rules say that your have DR/- but that it's doubled against nonlethal.
Therefore, to let the damage apply to your DR/- and DR/lethal would be double dipping.
Symbolically, your DR represents your incredible resilience. If the arrow is already embedded in your flesh, why would a rage power let you use your ridiculously tough skin again? It's already passed through.
It's not double dipping any more than letting both your DR/- and your Energy Resistance x apply to damage from a flaming weapon would be double dipping. After all, DR stands for Damage Resistance, so why would using both lethal Damage REsistance and nonlethal damage resistance be an issue.
Unless you can't use lethal damage resistance and fire damage resistance against a longsword with the flaming property. If you disallow one you have to disallow the other. You don't get to cherry pick when one applies and the other does not.
You don't have two DRs. That's what I'm telling you.
You have one DR that gets doubled if it's against nonlethal damage.
Fine. Faq it. Plenty of people still see it the same way I do, and I'm plenty sure it's ten times more than those who think otherwise.
@ Lobolusk: I'd talk to your GM for a concrete answer. ExposedWires and a few others aside, the general consensus on the boards is that it doubles up like you had originally said. See the links listed above for the original builds using this tactic.
That is absolutely not true. Everybody in this thread is saying it's not a good rage power. Go search through the rules questions forum for Guarded Life. It turns up thread after thread of people saying it sucks.
But that's beside the point. I'm not trying to prove you wrong. I don't win anything if I convince everybody I'm right. I really only care about game balance and fairness and I've been working this out in my head all day. If it follows your ruling, the only character who can take advantage of Guarded Life's superawesome ability is the Invulnerable Rager. Why would they put a rage power in that only works with a single archetype?
I broke it down to two reasons why the DR boost interpretation doesn't work. First, that the power specifies that you already got dealt the damage so it's past the stage where DR was applied. And Second, you don't have two DRs. It's one DR that is double when the damage is nonlethal. If an Invulnerable Rager gets hit with a sap, his natural DR is simply doubled. He doesn't add two huge DRs together. It's the same tough skin.
I'd love to be proved wrong on this as guarded life seems like it would never see the light of play under this strict interpretation, but I no longer see any evidence for it.
Prove it. I'm not up for seeing it your way when it working how i interpret it to do so allows the barbarian im playing right now to function. I argued a lot about it working the way you said it does when i first saw it, but I got proven wrong by plenty of other people. Why do you get to undo all that with just your goddamn opinion?
EDIT: I'm not caring about opinions. I want a yes or no concrete 100% RAW answer so I have the right to tell anyone who disagrees with me to go shove it and die in a hole because fact is fact and truth trumps opinion every time. I don't want some gm or other player to shoot down every concept i come up with just because he or she interprets it differently and is willing to go to hell and back just so I can't play the character initially how i wanted to play it.
...I thought I just did. Those two things I said have been mostly ignored in the discussion and I think that if those things I said are correct, all of the arguing about how much DR it adds was moot.
I don't know what else you want from me. I gave you my exact reasoning. I've been checking the resources available to me and even all the other rules questions threads for any additional insight but it appears that everybody who quibbled over which DR gets added when had to unconsciously skip over those two caveats I presented.
I have yet to see them addressed.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, though I will admit I am often overzealous in defense of my opinions. But as I've said I've argued the fine points and semantics of rules, RAW, and RAI all the way back to 2nd Edition, and I'm tired of it. I have little patience for repeated arguements and such.
If you want to prove me wrong, go convince Wiggz, Damocles Guile, TOZ and the others to see it your way too. It's their build I'm using, just tweaking it for personal taste. So far general consensus has been like this: if you'd be reduced to 0 hitpoints with greater guarded life, instead convert twice your barbarian level to nonlethal damage and apply it seperately to you nonlethal damage resistance, and apply the remaining lethal damage to your damage resistance. Anything that gets through you take like a man.
I want you to either agree to disagree so I can help this guy build his character in the manner we have agreed upon, or provide valid reasoning. The Damage Reduction is worded poorly, you do indeed have two damage reduction pools. Much like a zombie demon can have DR 5/bludgeoning and DR 10/good. Even if you bypass one you still gotta contend with the other. THis same rule is where you get the DR/- and DR/lethal, by simple virtue of DR/- can never be the same thing as DR/lethal, as one can be bypassed with lethal damage and the other cannot.
The Damage Reduction is worded poorly, you do indeed have two damage reduction pools.
If you have two DR pools that operate the way you say, then an Invulnerable Rager with DR 8/- (DR 16/lethal) has an effective DR of 24 against nonlethal damage because both those apply to an attack from a sap.
That's not right.
It would be true except for the fact DR does not stack. You take the greater of the two, much like a morale bonus or an enhancement bonus. The only reason it stacks for Guarded Life is the fact Guarded Life deliberatly splits it up into two different things by converting it. It's the conversion itself that allows it to work.
Say you have a Zombie Werewolf, he as DR 5/slashing and DR 10/silver. If you hit him with a silver spear you bypass the DR 10/silver, but he still negates 5 from his DR 5/bludgeoning. If you hit him with a normal spear he uses the greater of the two DR, not both combined. If you hit him with a silver longsword you bypass both. See how it works?
I guess I dotn understand how it is game breaking i am a barbarian it is literally what I do it is a one trick pony kind of thing. that only works in situational attacks. it prevents me form being killed out right and if i am in that situation chances are it is a good warning sign that i need to retreat.
Guarded Life (Ex)
Benefit: While raging, if the barbarian is reduced below 0 hit points, 1 hit point of lethal damage per barbarian level is converted to nonlethal damage. If the barbarian is at negative hit points due to lethal damage, she immediately stabilizes.
Guarded Life, Greater (Ex)
Prerequisite: Barbarian 6, guarded life rage power
Benefit: When using the guarded life rage power, 1 additional hit point of lethal damage per barbarian level is converted to nonlethal damage.
Alright, let's try using the SRD definition. WHen at 0 or below, any time you would take hitpoint damage convert your barbarian level in damage to nonlethal damage. For Greater Guarded Life, it's twice this. That means twice your level in damage is converted to nonlethal damage. And of course your DR is doubled vs lethal damage. Once converted, it is no longer apart of the same attack, because this is a rule that is not unless it says it is, much like a spell ends after you cast it unless it says it doesn't. This is crucial, as it allows your DR to apply to the remaining lethal damage.
Does this help you Lobolusk?
I understood completely. In fact, I think it's the reason your interpretation doesn't work. There is as of yet no support for a single attack to go through your DR twice. Which is exactly what you're arguing Guarded Life does. It turned that spear into a magic bullet that goes back through your DR. The language of the rage power says "convert". The language doesn't give any impression it's a whole new attack from any kind of weapon.
It just converts the damage to nonlethal which is a separate resource from lethal damage. The advantages of this are obvious but not as ballrocking as the uber DR boost.
Nonlethal damage is different. Basically it's the barbarian flexing his muscles, squeezing the spearhead back out, and then his DR soak up whatever he couldn't negate with his epic flexing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Damage Reduction (Ex)
At 7th level, a barbarian gains damage reduction. Subtract 1 from the damage the barbarian takes each time she is dealt damage from a weapon or a natural attack.
Invulnerability (Ex)
At 2nd level, the invulnerable rager gains DR/— equal to half her barbarian level. This damage reduction is doubled against nonlethal damage.
This ability replaces uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, and damage reduction.
Damage Reduction
Some magic creatures have the supernatural ability to instantly heal damage from weapons or ignore blows altogether as though they were invulnerable.
The numerical part of a creature's damage reduction (or DR) is the amount of damage the creature ignores from normal attacks. Usually, a certain type of weapon can overcome this reduction (see Overcoming DR). This information is separated from the damage reduction number by a slash. For example, DR 5/magic means that a creature takes 5 less points of damage from all weapons that are not magic. If a dash follows the slash, then the damage reduction is effective against any attack that does not ignore damage reduction.
Guarded Life (Ex)
Benefit: While raging, if the barbarian is reduced below 0 hit points, 1 hit point of lethal damage per barbarian level is converted to nonlethal damage. If the barbarian is at negative hit points due to lethal damage, she immediately stabilizes.
So if I understand the argument, the claim is that the converted damage is subject to damage reduction of the invulnerable rager. This rager takes damage and ignores the appropriate amount from the normal DR/-.
Now after this, if the rager is then still reduced below, not at, but below 0 hit points, guarded life then converts an appropriate amount of the remaining lethal damage into nonlethal damage.
So the real question is, what is the source of the nonlethal damage? If the source is guarded life, then it is not a "normal attack" as stated in the damage reduction entry and does not qualify to be ignored.
If however, the nonlethal damage is from the attack, then sure the rager ignores the appropriate amount of nonlethal damage as afforded to him by his invulnerabilty ability. (sounds stupid saying those two words together)
A strict reading might indicate the nonlethal damage is from guarded life, as you wouldn't be dealt nonlethal damage otherwise in this example. I am not saying a agree with this, but simply presenting that as food for thought.
Well, I . . . eh it's easier to argue a point when someone's directly disagreeing with you. I'll simply post what the SRD says on Damage Reduction instead.
Damage Reduction
Some magic creatures have the supernatural ability to instantly heal damage from weapons or ignore blows altogether as though they were invulnerable.
The numerical part of a creature's damage reduction (or DR) is the amount of damage the creature ignores from normal attacks. Usually, a certain type of weapon can overcome this reduction (see Overcoming DR). This information is separated from the damage reduction number by a slash. For example, DR 5/magic means that a creature takes 5 less points of damage from all weapons that are not magic. If a dash follows the slash, then the damage reduction is effective against any attack that does not ignore damage reduction.
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.
Attacks that deal no damage because of the target's damage reduction do not disrupt spells.
Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even non-magical fire) ignore damage reduction.
Sometimes damage reduction represents instant healing. Sometimes it represents the creature's tough hide or body. In either case, other characters can see that conventional attacks won't work.
If a creature has damage reduction from more than one source, the two forms of damage reduction do not stack. Instead, the creature gets the benefit of the best damage reduction in a given situation
Hey Lobolusk,
It's gamebreakingly awesome because as a barbarian you're actually a damage powerhouse. The tradeoff for barbarians was always the loss of AC. You rage and then you're dealing 2d6+CURRENT_US_DEBT several times a round. Having a single rage power that (without fail) more than doubles your DR over and over again without expending resources is absurdly good as it immediately trivializes the Barbarian's chief weakness.
I don't think your Invulnerable Rager has to give up enough of the chief vanilla barbarian advantages to justify the HUGE advantages it picks up in DR when paired with your interpretation of Guarded Life. It can deal pretty much the same damage as a vanilla barbarian, except that it's impossible to kill. That's not balance. It certainly doesn't seem to be intended. On review, I don't even think it works as written.
I'm not trying to ruin your build or excitement or anything. Honest.
Edit
Writer,
I can't tell what you could possibly be trying to express by pasting the Damage Reduction rules. Assiel had already posted parts and then showed all his work. It doesn't appear that you contributed anything. Please help me understand.
@ Lobolusk:
Alright, according to the rules concerning Damage Reduction, it is applied after you take the damage from an attack. Therefore, let us assume Guarded Life takes effect before your damage reduction does. This means you convert twice your level to nonlethal damage and then apply damage reduction. I see the nonlethal damage as seperate from the actual attack. Others obviously see this differently.
You have two possibilities. If it doesn't work, you still get twice your barbarian level as damage reduction through guided life, still making it pretty appealing to take. If it does work, you get to negate additional damage equal to your normal damage reduction, which would be awesome. Either way, it shows that your initial investment in Guarded Life and Greater Guarded Life as well as Damage Reduction wasn't a waste.
Does this help?
Edit:
@ Wires:
I was building to the point Assiel stated. He just beat me to it.
Writer, I think the disconnect here is that you think damage reduction takes place afterwards. This is incorrect by the rules we both quoted.
You have two options for applying damage reduction:
1. Ignore an amount of damage from each normal attack.
2. Subtract 1 (represents the DR amount) from the damage the barbarian takes each time she is dealt damage from a weapon or a natural attack.
Incidentally, they both end with the same result. You do not take damage and then undo it.
Here is what the SRD says about that:
For example, DR 5/magic means that a creature takes 5 less points of damage from all weapons that are not magic.
This is a specific example of how to apply damage reduction.
Now, for descriptive purposes to indicate from a DM to his players the SRD says:
Sometimes damage reduction represents instant healing. Sometimes it represents the creature's tough hide or body. In either case, other characters can see that conventional attacks won't work.
Could you please indicate which specific section says it applies after damage is taken?
Alright. So apply the DR first and then apply Guarded Life afterwards. So lon as the end result is the same I don't particularly care.
But it's not the same. At this point, you need to demonstrate where the Guarded Life rules state that it's dealing damage from a new source for you to apply DR again.