|
It's a penalty to your ability modifier.
That right there is what I don't seem to be seeing in the RAW. The rules state that Ability Damge imposes a penalty to "skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability". The lists that they give do not actually include the ability modifier.
If you can point out where it actually says the penalty applies to the ability modifier itself, I would likely change my opinion.
Damage: For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.
Drain: Ability drain actually reduces the relevant ability score. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability.
[...]In neither case does it say where to apply the change
I disagree, the penalty from damage is applied to the "skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability", the text then goes on to give explicit lists.
Drain is not so explicit, but it doesn't need to be because it says the Ability Score is actually changed - therefore all the other rules in other chapters of the CRB kick in and you re-calculate everything.
Damage should never leave you in an immediate sense worse off than a similar level of drain leaves you. Drain is uniformly the harsher penalty of the two.
I would generally agree, but it seems that Paizo chose to provide a quicker set of rules at the expense of some inconsistency.
Anyway, I think you will agree Paizo could do with putting together a comprehensive FAQ on this yes?
I'm not expanding the FAQ at all. This is how I've done ability damage since I started playing Pathfinder.
It's a penalty to your ability modifier.That right there is what I don't seem to be seeing in the RAW. The rules state that Ability Damge imposes a penalty to "skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability". The lists that they give do not actually include the ability modifier.
If you can point out where it actually says the penalty applies to the ability modifier itself, I would likely change my opinion.
The basis for my conclusion came directly after that - it was all the stuff you cut out.
It's a penalty to your ability modifier. It effects things which are based on that ability modifier. The rule says to apply it to things that benefit from that ability modifier. The penalty scales in the exact same manner as an ability modifier. To me, the most natural reading is that the penalty then applies to the ability modifier. But even if it's not the most natural reading, it certainly is a legitimate one (which is what I was getting at above), meaning there are at least two legitimate readings.
And Drain is equally explicit. It simply doesn't relist the things affected because the CRB just got done doing exactly that for Ability Damage. It all falls under the same heading.
As for the list, it's not exhaustive. It is simply a listing of different skills, statistics, and ability checks that are based off of the effected ability. That it says the penalty applies to those checks doesn't answer whether the penalty is applied specifically to the ability modifier first or simply tacked on in the calculus, which is the question we're actually talking about here.
|
|
Anyway, I think you will agree Paizo could do with putting together a comprehensive FAQ on this yes?
The only thing the FAQ would need to do is verify that the penalties apply directly to the modifier. Nothing more.
As The Shamrock said, if there are two possible interpretations, one of which creates wonky situations and the other does not, you're best bet is to go with the interpretation that doesn't give you wonky situations.
Damage penalties applied directly to the modifier (not tacked on at the end of the computation), leaves you with no wonky situations. And really, there are only a very few handful of situations, as The Shamrock pointed out, where it really makes a difference...in 99% of the situations, if you just tack the penalty on the end, you'll be fine. In those 1% situations where tacking it on gives you weird results, apply the penalty directly to the modifier instead, and you'll be fine.
|
|
It's a penalty to your ability modifier. It effects things which are based on that ability modifier. The rule says to apply it to things that benefit from that ability modifier. The penalty scales in the exact same manner as an ability modifier. To me, the most natural reading is that the penalty then applies to the ability modifier. But even if it's not the most natural reading, it certainly is a legitimate one (which is what I was getting at above), meaning there are at least two legitimate readings.
As for the list, it's not exhaustive. It is simply a listing of different skills, statistics, and ability checks that are based off of the effected ability.
Fair enough, but I still don't see that conclusion as coming from a strict reading of RAW - I see my reading explicit in the rules ("apply [the] penalty to skills and statistics listed" and AC is listed but Dex Modifier is not).
I feel your reading, though it might make much more sense, requires the reader to make a few inferences and assumptions; for example there is nothing in the text that to me even hints that the lists are not exhaustive as you claim - not an "e.g.", "for example" or "etc" - any of those would have suggested the list was not exhaustive.
That it says the penalty applies to those checks doesn't answer whether the penalty is applied specifically to the ability modifier first or simply tacked on in the calculus, which is the question we're actually talking about here.
But to me it does answer that, it says "apply [the] penalty to skills and statistics listed" and lists "Armour Class" against dexterity.
So if we suffer 4 points of Dexterity damage, we apply a -2 penalty to armour class, just like we do for the Blinded Condition, just like we do for the Cowering condition and just like we do for a raging Barbarian.
Basically if the rules say apply a penalty to Armor Class, that is exactly what I do - apply it straight to Armor Class, I don't apply it to Dexterity and then work out whether the armour's Max Dex Bonus means the Armor Class is actually reduced. And the RAW does explicitly state that the penalty resulting from Dexterity Damage is applied to Armor Class.
Ditto for Strength and Weapon Damage Rolls - if the RAW says apply the penalty to Weapon Damage Rolls I apply that in exactly the same way I would the -2 penalty to Weapon Damage Rolls for the Sickened condition, i.e. I apply it directly to the weapon damage roll; I don't apply the penalty to the Strength modifier and then multiply for using a two handed weapon, or halve it for using an off hand weapon.
In summary, I can see that your reading of the rules makes more sense, I just don't see it as being RAW - that is all I am saying.
|
|
The only thing the FAQ would need to do is verify that the penalties apply directly to the modifier. Nothing more.
I disagree, I would like it to clarify whether the list of skills and statistics affected is an exhaustive list or not (there is nothing in the RAW that to me suggests it isn't an exhaustive list, yet teh FAQ about Ability Bonuses seems to imply the intention is that it isn't an exhaustive list).
And if it isn't an exhaustive list, I would like the FAQ to clarify how Ability Damage and Penalties affect statistics derived from the Ability Score (rather than the Ability Modifier), e.g. Carrying Capacity, Death Threshold, Number of Rounds you can hold your breath etc.
As The Shamrock said, if there are two possible interpretations, one of which creates wonky situations and the other does not, you're best bet is to go with the interpretation that doesn't give you wonky situations.
Alas, I only see one possible reading of the strict RAW :(
And really, there are only a very few handful of situations, as The Shamrock pointed out, where it really makes a difference...in 99% of the situations, if you just tack the penalty on the end, you'll be fine.
Agreed.
In those 1% situations where tacking it on gives you weird results, apply the penalty directly to the modifier instead, and you'll be fine.
Or alternatively accept the occasional wonky result as the price for having a much quicker set of rules to apply.
For all we know, the Paizo designers knew there could be some wonky results but thought that was a fair price to pay for more streamlined rules (just like some people ditch counting every other diagonal as 10 feet of distance, accepting that it leads to the odd wonky situation but feeling the benefit of faster play is worth that).
|
|
Ability damange, in no way, shape or form, affects any feats or abilities that are predicated on that particular ability score. So, no, CHA damage will not affect turning attempts per day.
If we're talking about Channelling then it's not the Score but the modifier that determines uses per day "A cleric may channel energy a number of times per day equal to 3 + her Charisma modifier." The DC to resist the Channel is also based on the modifier.