Regeneration Timing Question

[Green Eyed Liar]

Here are the sequence of events:

1) Paladin smites regenerating creature for tons of damage.
2) Inquisitor falchions regenerating creature for tons of damage.
3) Archer shoots regenerating creature with flaming arrow for tons of damage.
4) Regenerating creature activates.

So, I am confused about what it means when, "Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration to stop functioning on the round following the attack."

Does this mean no damage in my above scenario is regenerated? Or, is the damage prior to the flaming arrow still regenerated?

[Marthian]

from my knowledge, if a creature is hit by something that prevents regeneration, it prevents it on the creature's next turn.

[x9ss]

RAW, The flaming arrow would stop the regeneration that round altogether. RAI is debatable, but it would seem pedantic to rule otherwise.

[Googleshng]

Green Eyed Liar wrote:

Does this mean no damage in my above scenario is regenerated?

Yes. Regeneration is handled round by round, not injury by injury. Similarly, if all the damage was from fire, and two rounds passed, that damage would regenerate, if the monster still had positive HP, despite coming from fire initially.

[Dust Raven]

It's kinda weird how regeneration works (or stops working).

1) Paladin smites regenerating creature for tons of damage.
2) Inquisitor falchions regenerating creature for tons of damage.
3) Wizard tosses a flask of alchemist fire, misses, but splashes for 1 point of fire damage.
4) Regenerating creature's regeneration fails to activate on its turn.
5) Paladin smites regenerating creature for tons of damage.
6) Regenerating creature dies.

[Spell Slingin' Steve]

I see it like this: Regeneration happens once a round, on the creature's turn. If the creature takes any fire damage at all it must spend its next turn "healing the burn" before it is able to heal any damage whether it is fire damage or otherwise.