DR and self damage from a Vicious weapon

[Mnemos]

Has their ever been an official statement about how this combination works? Vicious is a +1 weapon enhancement and it seems people are all over the map as to whether the damage (to the creature struck and the wielder) is energy damage or the same type as the weapon. It seems people run the though that either the damage done always goes through despite any dr on the monster's side or the the wielder's dr allows him to get a free extra 2d6 damage. I am perfectly comfortable with the damage to the creature being an extension of weapon damage and the dame to the wielder being something that bypasses dr because it is almost the charging force behind why the weapon does what it does. You don't pay it don't work kinda thing. I would really love something official in an FAQ.

Thanks,

[Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan]

Not that I'm aware, but I'll push the FAQ button for you.

[Evilserran]

I have always ruled that the self damage is "unmitigatable" therefor, you would still take damage, but thats my rule for using a powerful item the way i feel was intended. I also pushed FAQ for you tho.

[Davick]

Vicious damage is untyped energy damage. It's more akin to fire than weapon damage, but there is no resistance for it.

Use vicious, pay the price.

[fretgod99]

I think you may want to make a post with a clear and concise question.

How to use the FAQ System wrote:

Some FAQ threads get marked as "Question unclear." What does that mean?

If a flagged post is poorly written, doesn’t provide enough information about the question, includes multiple questions, or doesn't include a question at all, the normal staff response is to mark the post as unclear so people can rephrase the question or include additional information. See “What’s the best way to get a FAQ answered?,” below.

I've seen this pop up a couple of times, so they could respond to a clear question. But the way your post is worded, you might not elicit the response you desire.

[tkul]

One of the AP's has a barbarian with a Vicious Weapon and says that character doesn't take damage from it because of DR but I'm not sure how official you want to take that to be.

[Wyrmholez]

The discriptive text says it a flash of disruptive energy and DR doesn't apply to energy attacks. It seems to me that the flavor of the enchantment would make both the 2d6 and 1d6 untyped energy.

If DR is applied against the +2d6 I'd think the same for the 1d6 as well.

[Davick]

Vicious wrote:

This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage

Energy bypasses DR, and since it is untyped there is no resistance that will apply to it.

I bet a dollar if there is a faq answer it will be, "No reply required."

[Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan]

Davick wrote:

Vicious wrote:

This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage

Energy bypasses DR, and since it is untyped there is no resistance that will apply to it.

I bet a dollar if there is a faq answer it will be, "No reply required."

Except apparently there is a PFS module where a bad guy with DR does not take the damage. I can't speak to specifics, as I don't know what module, and I haven't played it.

[James Risner]

Davick wrote:

Vicious wrote:

This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage

Energy bypasses DR, and since it is untyped there is no resistance that will apply to it.

I bet a dollar if there is a faq answer it will be, "No reply required."

I agree it is energy and DR does not protect from Energy.

The OP needed to post the question like this:

Quote:

Does DR on the target or wielder apply to Vicious which seems to be energy damage and not typed the same as the weapon?

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

Except apparently there is a PFS module where a bad guy with DR does not take the damage. I can't speak to specifics, as I don't know what module, and I haven't played it.

Which you need to consider is basically a Rule 0 thing. I've seem modules/scenarios that have the bad guys take more actions in a round than possible, not have spell component pouches or Eschew Materials yet still cast, Clerics without Holy Symbols Channeling, spells used in ways they don't work, Diplomacy that can be used mid combat, etc. Run it as written in the tactics and ignore that it violates the rules. Otherwise the whole ruleset would be changed.

[Chris Lambertz]

Merged threads.

[Bizbag]

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

Davick wrote:

Vicious wrote:

This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage

Energy bypasses DR, and since it is untyped there is no resistance that will apply to it.

I bet a dollar if there is a faq answer it will be, "No reply required."

Except apparently there is a PFS module where a bad guy with DR does not take the damage. I can't speak to specifics, as I don't know what module, and I haven't played it.

While I don't know the module, I can attest that it does exist; I recall the same thing.

Modules sometimes make exceptions for specific encounters though - perhaps the barbarian in question is special an players are not intended to resist the DR?

I'm just going to FAQ this thread.

[Davick]

Bizbag wrote:

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

Davick wrote:

Vicious wrote:

This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage

Energy bypasses DR, and since it is untyped there is no resistance that will apply to it.

I bet a dollar if there is a faq answer it will be, "No reply required."

Except apparently there is a PFS module where a bad guy with DR does not take the damage. I can't speak to specifics, as I don't know what module, and I haven't played it.

While I don't know the module, I can attest that it does exist; I recall the same thing.

Modules sometimes make exceptions for specific encounters though - perhaps the barbarian in question is special an players are not intended to resist the DR?

I'm just going to FAQ this thread.

If the module specifically mentions that the character doesn't take vicious damage, that's evidence that it isn't the norm.

[SwiftyKun]

The scenario is scenario specific. The scenario in question actually lends proof that vicious actually is untyped damage. If anything is in the normal rules like DR applying to vicious they would not need to specifically call out that he has DR against vicious. Because they ARE calling it to attention it's only for that one guy.

[Scavion]

Davick wrote:

Bizbag wrote:

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

Davick wrote:

Vicious wrote:

This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage

Energy bypasses DR, and since it is untyped there is no resistance that will apply to it.

I bet a dollar if there is a faq answer it will be, "No reply required."

Except apparently there is a PFS module where a bad guy with DR does not take the damage. I can't speak to specifics, as I don't know what module, and I haven't played it.

While I don't know the module, I can attest that it does exist; I recall the same thing.

Modules sometimes make exceptions for specific encounters though - perhaps the barbarian in question is special an players are not intended to resist the DR?

I'm just going to FAQ this thread.

If the module specifically mentions that the character doesn't take vicious damage, that's evidence that it isn't the norm.

Or they could be reminding you thats how it works since it is unclear.

[Mnemos]

I am trying to clean up the question and make it as direct as possible.

Does the DR of an Invulnerable Rager prevent the damage caused when using a vicious weapon?

Even in this thread there is discussion around it and I have not seen a developer respond regarding this, yet.

Thanks,
Bob

[Davick]

Does anybody have the text from the module in question?

[Mnemos]

Spoiler:

Note that ...’s greataxe has the vicious property on it, but that his damage reduction prevents any of the return damage the +2 vicious greataxe would deal back to him.

[Nefreet]

Should probably spoiler that name.

[James Risner]

Mnemos wrote:

his damage reduction prevents any of the return damage the +2 vicious greataxe would deal back to him.

Yea, that isn't correct from a rules perspective. That happened either because they gave him a boost or the author didn't understand the rules.

[Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan]

James Risner wrote:

Mnemos wrote:

his damage reduction prevents any of the return damage the +2 vicious greataxe would deal back to him.

Yea, that isn't correct from a rules perspective. That happened either because they gave him a boost or the author didn't understand the rules.

So let's get this FAQ'd, and if we're wrong, and they decide DR does stop the Vicious damage, then standby for more Vicious wielding Barbarians, and Adamantine wearers.

[James Risner]

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

So let's get this FAQ'd

They can't fix it with a FAQ entry, it would require errata to say it isn't energy but damage of the same type as the weapon.

[Blackstorm]

James Risner wrote:

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

So let's get this FAQ'd

They can't fix it with a FAQ entry, it would require errata to say it isn't energy but damage of the same type as the weapon.

I FAQ'd it anyway. Often the FAQ comes with the "we add this as errata in next printing" note.