| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
When a creature deals damage from a Rend, does DR apply separately against that damage or does it get stacked on the damage from one of the attacks that allowed it in the first place? If the damage from the multiple attacks is of different types/materials, does the creature get to choose which type of damage the Rend is?
|
When a creature deals damage from a Rend, does DR apply separately against that damage or does it get stacked on the damage from one of the attacks that allowed it in the first place? If the damage from the multiple attacks is of different types/materials, does the creature get to choose which type of damage the Rend is?
I don't believe that Pathfinder rend really answers these questions, I'm afraid. The Two-Weapon Rend feat in 3.5 stated that damage from the feat was treated as if it had come from your off-hand weapon for determining the type of damage, material, enhancement bonus and so on, but the Pathfinder version of the feat contains no such text. The monster ability Rend isn't any more forthcoming.
My personal opinion is this;
DR shouldn't apply against Rend, since DR has already applied against all attacks that hit to trigger the rend. To balance this, I would say all triggering attacks have to actually deal damage to trigger a rend. Furthermore, Power Attack should not apply to rend; again, the rending creature has already benefited from Power Attack on the triggering attacks. Same for sneak attack, or anything else which adds damage.
This also removes the main reason to designate the type of damage, material and so on that the rend damage comes from, since DR and the like has already been taken into account. In case it's still relevant (such as in the case of certain oozes), I would say go with the 3.5 idea and treat rend damage as coming from the final triggering attack, be that off-hand, second claw, or whatever.
|
There was a really old post that one of the writers said that Rend is added to the 2nd attack if both attacks (or more attacks) hit.
It's a complicated reason, but basically if it wasn't ruled that way, it opened a lot questions on why other damage sources didn't get added onto Rend.
My opinion is that is should be counted separately because a level 11 feat (basically it's a level 11 feat) that only adds d10 + 1.5 STR is pretty crappy. But Paizo almost always rules on the side of safety.
Greetings, fellow travellers.
DR is not applied to damage from rend. Rend is going off of two previous successful hits (where DR applies) - it has no attack roll associated with itself.
Imagine you hit twice that round already, your (natural) weapon is still stuck within your opponent and you give it that final twist to make your hit count for what it's worth: tadaaa 1d10+ 1.5x STR extra damage.
Ruyan.
|
When a creature deals damage from a Rend, does DR apply separately against that damage or does it get stacked on the damage from one of the attacks that allowed it in the first place? If the damage from the multiple attacks is of different types/materials, does the creature get to choose which type of damage the Rend is?
I don't think there is a specific rule that applies to this. However, I tend to think that if there is no additional attack roll, then the effect is additional damage to the original attack; if so, DR has already applied.
Some effects are of the form, "if x happens, then rend for an additional y damage." These would not be subject to DR. Edit: Rend is like this.
Other effects are of the form, "if x happens, then make an additional attack for y damage." This would involve another attack roll and would be subject to additional DR. Edit: Rake is like this.
My quotes are paraphrased and there may not be creatures to which both apply. (I'm non an encyclopedia type guy.) But, I think either of these could be how an effect is treated and differentiates when DR applies.
As a side note, the idea of whether there is a roll to attack is a games mastery element and applies in various forms throughout the rule. The same distinction would apply for energy resistance, sneak attack, etc.
I don't think there is a specific rule that applies to this. However, I tend to think that if there is no additional attack roll, then the effect is additional damage to the original attack; if so, DR has already applied.
Some effects are of the form, "if x happens, then rend for an additional y damage." These would not be subject to DR.
Other effects are of the form, "if x happens, then make an additional attack for y damage." This would involve another attack roll and would be subject to additional DR.
My quotes are paraphrased and there may not be creatures to which both apply. (I'm non an encyclopedia type guy.) But, I think either of these could be how an effect is treated and differentiates when DR applies.
As a side note, the idea of whether there is a roll to attack is a games mastery element and applies in various forms throughout the rule. The same distinction would apply for energy resistance, sneak attack, etc.
So what if the original damage didn't already overcome DR? Is the remaining DR subtracted from Rend? Ex: Facing a DR 10/- critter, the original attack did 5 points of damage, well below the DR. Does the first 5 from Rend get subtracted before the critter actually takes damage? Or does the critter take full Rend damage no-matter how badly the original attack failed to exceed DR?.
|
|
So what if the original damage didn't already overcome DR? Is the remaining DR subtracted from Rend? Ex: Facing a DR 10/- critter, the original attack did 5 points of damage, well below the DR. Does the first 5 from Rend get subtracted before the critter actually takes damage? Or does the critter take full Rend damage no-matter how badly the original attack failed to exceed DR?.
Note: this is mainly opinion; I don't think it is covered anywhere explicitly.
It depends a bit on the wording of the ability being used. If the ability adds extra damage, then add it all up to see if it overcomes the DR, Sneak Attack is an example of this. Some abilities require that you damage an opponent for them to be effective. If the initial attack doesn't overcome DR, there was no damage and thus the ability isn't triggered.
In the case of Rend, it does extra damage, and only needs to hit, not damage. Rend typically happens when multiple attacks land, such as 2 claws. If both attacks landed, but neither got through DR, the rend still takes place as additional damage. While this isn't exactly covered, I would add the rend damage to the larger of the two non-damaging original attacks to determine what gets through DR.
Example, a troll attacks a clay golum. The troll hits with two claws for 7 and 9 damage vs. DR 10. Rend is triggered, and the roll gives 12 points of damage. The troll was 1 point short of hitting DR10 with one claw, so the rend is reduced by that one point. The golum takes 11 points from rend.
I don't think this is explicitly covered anywhere, but this seems to be a reasonable interpretation, to me. Edit: reef found the text and ninja'd me to boot.
|
|
This appears subject to DM discretion, but what seems to make the most sense with DR is that if an attack needed to do Rend damage fails to do any damage, then the Rend will not happen. Kind of like how a creature with poison in its tail attack needs to overcome DR to inject poison. If you don't do weapon/natural weapon damage, you don't get the bonuses that come with the damage.
Here is a quote from the DR entry in the Core Rulebook:
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.
Good find, reef. This is the passage I was thinking of in my first paragraph in my last post, but didn't find. I agree that there is some GM leeway on this and different GMs might view a given attack differently, or even a given attack vs. how they view given DR working. It can depend a bit on how it is visualized or whether that is important rather than mere abstraction. Ultimately there are enough waffle words in the text to allow it to be handled on a case by case basis.