|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Is DR taken into acount towards the dmg delt under the spell sheild other?
For exemple, my cleric have DR5/evil (righteous might) while "sheilding" a barbarian with a DR4/-.
let say the barb is hit for 8 damage by a typical orc. Both of us would be hit for 4 but both our DR would stop it right?
Yet again the same cituation arise but this time the orc have the "evil" subtype. The barb would get 0 but my cleric would get the full 4 damage... again am i right?
Here's how I think it works.
Any damage reduction that the target of the Shield Other spell has applies. It applies first, before the damage is split, because only the damage that gets through counts.
Ork hits Barb for 8. Barb's DR reduces damage by 4, leaving 4 to get through. That 4 is split due to Shield Other, 2 to the Barb and 2 to the Cleric. The cleric's DR does not apply, because a) DR is only applied once and has aready been applied and b) this damage is coming from an effect due to a spell, Shield Other, and spells ignore DR.
|
|
Here's how I think it works.
Any damage reduction that the target of the Shield Other spell has applies. It applies first, before the damage is split, because only the damage that gets through counts.
Ork hits Barb for 8. Barb's DR reduces damage by 4, leaving 4 to get through. That 4 is split due to Shield Other, 2 to the Barb and 2 to the Cleric. The cleric's DR does not apply, because a) DR is only applied once and has aready been applied and b) this damage is coming from an effect due to a spell, Shield Other, and spells ignore DR.
Ok so if i got you right once the barb got hit...
A)Barb DR comes first.B)Damage taken by the barb is then halve, in this case 2.
C)Since my cleric take 2 damage because of a spell or the "sheild other" effect in this case, his own DR does not apply.
Right?
You are understanding me correctly.
I disagree. I think that when the Target of shield other is hit by an attack, they apply damage reduction before taking the damage as normal, then the damage is divided between the subject and the caster; but once half of the damage is transferred to the caster, its source is considered magical and will not be reduced any further by any damage reduction the caster has.
How are you disagreeing? It sounds like everyone is in perfect agreement. DR works for the original target, but the cleric who cast Shield Other does not gain benefit of any DR he has.
How are you disagreeing? It sounds like everyone is in perfect agreement. DR works for the original target, but the cleric who cast Shield Other does not gain benefit of any DR he has.
I misread the first clarification.
In my defense, the thread creator hasn't agreed with anything yet, he just checked to see if he understood the position. That's the same thing I do in a disagreement, even when I think I'm right.
|
This spell wards the subject and creates a mystic connection between you and the subject so that some of its wounds are transferred to you. The subject gains a +1 deflection bonus to AC and a +1 resistance bonus on saves. Additionally, the subject takes only half damage from all wounds and attacks (including those dealt by special abilities) that deal hit point damage. The amount of damage not taken by the warded creature is taken by you. Forms of harm that do not involve hit points, such as charm effects, temporary ability damage, level draining, and death effects, are not affected. If the subject suffers a reduction of hit points from a lowered Constitution score, the reduction is not split with you because it is not hit point damage. When the spell ends, subsequent damage is no longer divided between the subject and you, but damage already split is not reassigned to the subject.
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.
The barbarians DR comes after the damage is halved. This is consistent with the way other half damage effects work. For instance if you have energy resistance fire, are hit by a fireball and save. You take the fireball damage, halve it, and then apply the energy resistance. So in the OP example, the the barbarian would take half of the damage, 4 which his DR reduces to 0, then the cleric would take the remaining 4 damage. The cleric however, is not getting hit by a "normal attack" and therefore his DR doesn't apply.
On a side note if the shielded person is hit for an odd amount of damage, the cleric takes the extra point. (In the above example, if the orc hit for 9 damage, the barbarian would take 0, the cleric 5)|
|
...The barbarians DR comes after the damage is halved. This is consistent with the way other half damage effects work....
I admit this is the way i "instinctively" saw the problem but do you have more precise bits of rules or anything else that show that this is "consistent" like you said because i found nothing.
Sorry Thebethia, that is not correct.
This spell wards the subject and creates a mystic connection between you and the subject so that some of its wounds are transferred to you. The subject gains a +1 deflection bonus to AC and a +1 resistance bonus on saves. Additionally, the subject takes only half damage from all wounds and attacks (including those dealt by special abilities) that deal hit point damage. The amount of damage not taken by the warded creature is taken by you.
Note the wounds are transferred to you, not the attack itself. It's the damage done by the attack that get's transferred.
So, if our barbarian had DR 4/--, and got hit by a goblin's bow and took 1d4 damage, he would not take ANY wound or damage, therefore there would be no hit point damage to transfer to the cleric. The spell transfers the actual wounds to you, not the potential damage, the actual damage. By your definition, then if the barbarian were in a fireball, the cleric would take half the fireball's damage, even if the barbarian made his save on evasion/improved evasion for half/no damage, since you are applying the POTENTIAL damage to both then taking defenses into account.
That is not how the spell works. It only transfers actual hit point damage. So, if the barbarian saves for no damage with improved evasion, the cleric takes nothing just as the barbarian took nothing. With DR, the barbarian applies his DR to the damage, then the actual hit point damage he took is split in half and half applied to the cleric.
|
|
Well feel free to disagree. But unfortunately this is how shield other works. The cleric gets the short end of the stick. If said barbarian with DR 4/- were to get hit for 4 damage, the cleric would still take 2 even though the barbarian would have taken none. It's another case of: if you have multiple overlapping defenses, you apply them in the way that is least favorable to you.
The line says "takes only half damage from wounds and attacks." To clarify, lets write this as two sentences:
The subject takes only half damage from all wounds. The subject takes only half damage from all attacks.
So if the subject is wounded, such as from falling, he only takes half the damage. If the subject is hit with an attack, he only takes half the damage the attack would have done. They include the word "wounds" in there because if they did not, then the spell would only affect damage that was received though an attack. If they meant for it to apply only to actual damage taken, then they would not have included "attacks" as a separate qualifier.
Also look at the description of DR, DR represents instantly healing or ignoring the pain "as though they were invulnerable." A creature with DR is not actually invulnerable. They are still taking the wounds, wounds which are still transferred to the cleric even if the subject of the spell would have ignored or healed them on his own.
Let's take your parsing...
You take half damage from wounds that do hit point damage. Ok, let's look at the 1d4 situation. The barbarian has DR 4/--. Is there a wound that does hit point damage? No.
You take half damage from attacks that do hit point damage. Ok, let's look at the 1d4 situation. The barbarian has DR 4/--. Is there a wound that does hit point damage? No. There is no attack that did hit point damage.
EDIT : And before you argue about the 'wounds and attacks' again, it's split up, I agree, to differentiate. Wounds would be bleed effects. Attacks new attack rolls. However, both have to do hit point damage, you can't just ignore that last bit. If it doesn't do hit point damage (either because no damage got through, or because it's a poison effect, or a stat drain, or because it's non-lethal damage (which is not hit point damage) then it doesn't transfer)).
As to DR..
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 from normal attacks.[b] 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.
[b]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.
Let's look at it ALL, not just a cherry picked fluff line.
1) The bolded bit above : The Barbarian IGNORES the damage from that attack. Later, it talks about attacks that don't bypass DR also ignore special effects, like poison, etc. This indicates that the damage has to get completely through the DR before other effects can take place (such as damage transfer to the cleric for example).
2) The italics part : Anything with a dash works against any non-magic non-energy attack, and thus is effective against an arrow that only does 1d4.
3) The bolded/italicized bit : This is really just you trying to worm something about instant healing instead of being invulnerable. That's fluff, not crunch, but let's look at the fluff anyway...
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. At 10th level, and every three barbarian levels thereafter (13th, 16th, and 19th level), this damage reduction rises by 1 point. Damage reduction can reduce damage to 0 but not below 0.
Oh, look at that, there's no fluff on why the barbarian has DR. So that leaves the fluff up to the player, it can be 'I have really hard skin' or 'I heal really fast' but either way, the DR stops them from taking damage, if they stop taking damage, they don't take damage, and you can't transfer something that isn't there.
If you did want to force a type of DR though, the existing rules point towards barbarians being invulnerable, not quick healers.
Invulnerable Rager
Some barbarians learn to take whatever comes their way, shrugging off mortal wounds with ease. These barbarians invite their enemies to attack them, and use pain to fuel their rage. An invulnerable rager has the following class features.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.
Extreme Endurance (Ex): At 3rd level, the invulnerable rager is inured to either hot or cold climate effects (choose one) as if using endure elements. In addition, the barbarian gains 1 point of fire or cold resistance for every three levels beyond 3rd. This ability replaces trap sense.
Rage Powers: The following rage powers complement the invulnerable rager archetype: come and get me, guarded life, increased damage reduction*, inspire ferocity, reckless abandon, and renewed vigor*.
if you have multiple overlapping defenses, you apply them in the way that is least favorable to you.
I'm looking for the reference now, but I thought it was always the order MOST favorable to the target (friend or foe). If I find the reference, I'll edit.
EDIT: I haven't found a general statement, but I have found a specific statement for damage reduction: "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."
So at least for the case of overlapping damage reduction, you apply them in the way that is MOST favorable to you, not least. I'm still looking for a more general statement.
There was a 3.X Sage Advice column that specified that when a creature has multiple overlapping defenses, it applied them in the way that was MOST favorable to it.
Since that doesn't explicitly apply to Pathfinder, I didn't bring it forth, but I suspect this is the particular 'rule' that is being mis-remembered.
The DR does set a precedent for taking the "best defense", however. I am inclined to agree with the majority and mdt's explanation in particular.