We were recently fighting a Lich whom has a DR 15/Bludgeoning and Magic.
A lengthy argument arose over whether the damage from Stone Call would actually effect him. I was hoping to get some clarification.I pointed out that the rocks appear from nowhere and vanish at the end of the duration. Would this not indicate that they are magical?
Also the description of DR mentions that it is overcome by all Spells.
Obviously I am trying to get people to agree with me. And I did notice that the spell specifically states that it does bludgeoning damage. Which it would not need to say if it was already bypassing DR.
Anyone have a final ruling?
Spells always bypass DR. Otherwise skeletons and zombies would be immune to magic missile.
"Magic and bludgeoning" means that a weapon (DR only affects attacks, which is weird but RAW) has to be both a bludgeoning weapon and a magic weapon but doesn't affect non-attack damage. Thus the stupidness of not taking damage from a thrown brick but from a falling one.
Spells don't always bypass DR. They just usually deal a form of damage that bypasses DR.
A rain of dirt, gravel, and small pebbles fills the area, dealing 2d6 points of bludgeoning damage to every creature in the area. This damage only occurs once, when the spell is cast.
this is thus physical damage and is subject to damage reduction. (the advantage is that its NOT subject to protection from energy)Created or not, the stones are not +1 or higher magical weapons, and thus don't bypass the damage reduction.
Sorry, the lich is immune to the damage from this spell. Break out the big boy spells for a lich.
Spells don't always bypass DR. They just usually deal a form of damage that bypasses DR.
A rain of dirt, gravel, and small pebbles fills the area, dealing 2d6 points of bludgeoning damage to every creature in the area. This damage only occurs once, when the spell is cast.
this is thus physical damage and is subject to damage reduction. (the advantage is that its NOT subject to protection from energy)Created or not, the stones are not +1 or higher magical weapons, and thus don't bypass the damage reduction.
Sorry, the lich is immune to the damage from this spell. Break out the big boy spells for a lich.
Where do you get this from? This is what the PF SRD has to say on DR:
"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 nonmagical 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. "
(my bolding)
I think it's pretty clear that spells deal full damage regardless of type. DR only works against direct attacks. In other words, if the barbarian throws a brick at you, your DR works, but if it falls of a building, you're dead meat.
Stupid, yes. RAW, yes.
Damage Reduction (DR): Creatures that are resistant to harm typically have damage reduction. This amount is subtracted from any damage dealt to them from a physical source. Most types of DR can be bypassed by certain types of weapons. This is denoted by a “/” followed by the type, such as “10/cold iron.” Some types of DR apply to all physical attacks. Such DR is denoted by the “—” symbol. See Special Abilities for more information.
Now, you can argue that there's a direct contradiction between
Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction.
and
This amount is subtracted from any damage dealt to them from a physical source.
but what insane troll logic are you trying to use to argue that DR is ineffective against a brick falling out of a chimney?
*looks around for raving dork*
honesty, why do you need to ask that
This amount is subtracted from any damage dealt to them from a physical source.
a pit trap is a physical source. The damage is reduced. end of story.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
BigNorseWolf, no offence, you're wrong.
It is very clearly spelled out (pun intended) that spells ignore DR.
The damage from stone call, ice storm or any of the others is magical, it isn't from a 'physical source' it's from a spell.
DR doesn't block Alchemists' fire either, despite it being a physical source.
BigNorseWolf, no offence, you're wrong.
It is very clearly spelled out (pun intended) that spells ignore DR.
The damage from stone call, ice storm or any of the others is magical, it isn't from a 'physical source' it's from a spell.
its bludgeoning, which is physical, which is blocked by dr. yes i see the direct contradiction with what stringburka posted.
DR doesn't block Alchemists' fire either, despite it being a physical source.
thats energy damage (fire), not physical damage (bludgeoning peircing slashing)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
BigNorseWolf, no offence, you're wrong.
It is very clearly spelled out (pun intended) that spells ignore DR.
The damage from stone call, ice storm or any of the others is magical, it isn't from a 'physical source' it's from a spell.
its bludgeoning, which is physical, which is blocked by dr. yes i see the direct contradiction with what stringburka posted.
DR doesn't block Alchemists' fire either, despite it being a physical source.thats energy damage (fire), not physical damage (bludgeoning peircing slashing)
Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction. Spells are in the same line with energy attacks Stone Call is a spell.
ahah... found it
Q: I cant help but notice there are some spells in the Core Rulebook that deal damage types other than energy. For example, you cast Ice Storm on a group of enemy undead, lets say in this instance, a mixed group of Zombies and Skeletons. Zombies have Damage Reduction 5/Slashing and Skeletons have Damage Reduction 5/Bludgeoning AND have Immunity to Cold. What would suffer damage and from what source?
A: (James Jacobs 3/27/10) When a spell mentions that a specific type of damage caused is bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, that DOES have to overcome a creature's DR. Some spells create magic effects, while others use magic to create physical effects; that's a major theme of conjuration magic (and creation magic in particular). If you hit an ooze with the Split ability with the appropriate type of damage, be that from a spell or weapon, it will split. And if you drop a spell that, say, does piercing damage on something with damage reduction like 5/bludgeoning, that piercing damage will get offset by the damage reduction.
Casting ice storm on a mix of zombies and skeletons would indeed be complex. The zombies would reduce the damage taken from the bludgeoning portion of the spell but take full damage from the cold, while the skeletons would just ignore the cold damage entirely and take full damage from the bludgeoning.
MOST spells don't inflict bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage at all. And most spells don't inflict multiple types of damage either. Lightning bolt, for example, just causes electricity damage. It bypasses DR entirely but not electricity resistance or electricity immunity. And unless the spell description says so specifically, bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage it inflicts is not automatically also treated as bypassing magic. Again; the damaging object is CREATED by magic and PROPELLED by magic, but is not in and of itself magic.
A spell that conjures a flight of arrows that deals piercing damage should be reduced by DR/bludgeoning or slashing. If it doesn't, then that spell's damage type shouldn't be listed as piercing at all, but untyped damage. Spells and effects that do untyped damage are pretty rare in Pathfinder, since these spells are quite powerful since their damage can't be stopped by any form of immunity, resistance, or damage reduction.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/extras/pathfinder-faq
So a designer clearly stated that since the damage is typed it can only overcome DR of that same type, and is not itself magical.
But nowhere in the RAW description of DR does it say...
This amount is subtracted from any damage dealt to them from a physical source.
yes, that IS in the raw. i quoted it from the raw. there is usually more than one description of any particular ability or term in the books somewhere.
you can find what i quoted at
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gettingStarted.html#dr
under damage reduction. In my players guide its under common terms on page 12, upper left hand corner.
So what about oddly-typed damage such as falling?
Bludgeoning. I don't expect the raw to spell out that a bowling ball with a circumference of 24,000 miles is blunt
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
ahah... found it
Q: I cant help but notice there are some spells in the Core Rulebook that deal damage types other than energy. For example, you cast Ice Storm on a group of enemy undead, lets say in this instance, a mixed group of Zombies and Skeletons. Zombies have Damage Reduction 5/Slashing and Skeletons have Damage Reduction 5/Bludgeoning AND have Immunity to Cold. What would suffer damage and from what source?
A: (James Jacobs 3/27/10) When a spell mentions that a specific type of damage caused is bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, that DOES have to overcome a creature's DR. Some spells create magic effects, while others use magic to create physical effects; that's a major theme of conjuration magic (and creation magic in particular). If you hit an ooze with the Split ability with the appropriate type of damage, be that from a spell or weapon, it will split. And if you drop a spell that, say, does piercing damage on something with damage reduction like 5/bludgeoning, that piercing damage will get offset by the damage reduction.
Casting ice storm on a mix of zombies and skeletons would indeed be complex. The zombies would reduce the damage taken from the bludgeoning portion of the spell but take full damage from the cold, while the skeletons would just ignore the cold damage entirely and take full damage from the bludgeoning.
MOST spells don't inflict bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage at all. And most spells don't inflict multiple types of damage either. Lightning bolt, for example, just causes electricity damage. It bypasses DR entirely but not electricity resistance or electricity immunity. And unless the spell description says so specifically, bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage it inflicts is not automatically also treated as bypassing magic. Again; the damaging object is CREATED by magic and PROPELLED by magic, but is not in and of itself magic.
A spell that conjures a flight of arrows that deals piercing damage should be reduced by DR/bludgeoning or slashing. If it...
I stand corrected. Now if only, yaknow the actual core rulebook was clear.
(aside, this is a change from 3.x One of the (many) complaints about (in)complete Psi was that they ruled this applied to the various crystal based powers, but not to spells with specific damage. Yet another reason to hate that book)
I stand corrected. Now if only, yaknow the actual core rulebook was clear.
wheres the fun in that? :)
(aside, this is a change from 3.x One of the (many) complaints about (in)complete Psi was that they ruled this applied to the various crystal based powers, but not to spells with specific damage. Yet another reason to hate that book)
i think the rule existed in 3.5 as well, but as with the pathfinder book there was a bit of a rules contradiction. Most of these conundrums will yield to a loosening the the raw , looking at the underlying physics and following through.
most.....