Armor Ability Question


Rules Questions

Silver Crusade

I'm wondering if I'm readying the Deathless ability you can add to armor correctly. It's located in the Ultimate Equipment book on page 117. Since this ability protects you from the first 10 damage of negative abilities on each attack, then doesn't it protect you from the strength drains of shadows, since they are from negative energy affects? The drain is said to be Strength damage and its said to be negative energy. Here is the test to deathless below.

DEATHLESS
PRICE
+1 BONUS
AURA moderate abjuration CL 7th WEIGHT —
This armor protects its wearer from harmful negative and
positive energy, including channeled energy. The armor
absorbs the first 10 points of positive or negative energy
damage per attack that the wearer would normally take. The
wearer has a 25% chance to ignore negative levels from any
attack. Deathless armor does not block healing of any kind
and does not protect against positive or negative energy
effects that do not deal damage or bestow negative levels.
The deathless ability can be applied to armor of any sort, but
not shields.
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS
COST +1 bonus


no, negative energy damage and attacks that use negative energy are not the same


The line to pay attention to is "Deathless armor does not ... protect against ... negative energy effects that do not deal damage..."

A Shadow's negative energy attack does not deal hit point damage; it deals ability damage.

Think of Deathless as being akin to Resist Energy, except it's versus negative energy instead of elemental energy.

Silver Crusade

The line to pay attention to is "Deathless armor does not ... protect against ... negative energy effects that do not deal damage..."

It doesn't say hit point damage in that statement it says negative energy damage. Where does it clarify that damage = hit point damage? As it reads it protects against anything that does positive or negative energy damage and the shadow touching you does "strength damage" and then it goes on to explain about how the strength damage is a negative energy effect. I guess we need to find where the word "damage" is clarified as meaning "hit point damage and only hit point damage".

Silver Crusade

Here's an example:

Damage: A damage spell reduces the target's depletable statistics, bringing the target closer to the point where that damage incapacitates it. Damage spells are reliable spells because all creatures have depletable statistics of some sort and because most nonmagical attacks affect depletable statistics (which means that the caster's fighter and rogue allies are helping overcome the opponent). Damage spells are better than penalize spells because damage always stacks (penalties do not) and if the caster and his allies deal enough damage, they'll eventually disable an opponent, whereas it's possible to add penalties almost indefinitely and still have a somewhat viable opponent. Examples of damage spells are cone of cold, fireball, lightning bolt, magic missile, poison, and sound burst.

See how it mentions "A damage spell reduces the target's depletable statistics, bringing the target closer to the point where that damage incapacitates it."?

Now we go and see what "depletable statistics" means.

Depletable Statistics

Depletable statistics are any values in a creature or object's stat block that can be reduced by some form of attack and that can neutralize, kill, or destroy the creature or object when they reach a low value (typically 0). Hit points, ability scores, and levels are all depletable statistics—a creature falls unconscious below 0 hit points and eventually dies; objects, undead, and constructs are destroyed at 0 hit points; creatures are made helpless or killed by bringing an ability score to 0; creatures die when their negative levels equal their total Hit Dice. Many magical attacks and most nonmagical attacks reduce a target's depletable statistics in some way, eventually defeating the target. However, attack bonuses, saving throw bonuses, Armor Class, hardness, CMB, CMD, initiative, speed, skill modifiers, and most other game statistics are not depletable statistics because no matter how low these statistics get, the affected creature or object is still able to take actions. For example, a spell that gives a target a –10 attack penalty has little effect on a sorcerer casting fireball, as would a spell that gave her a –10 penalty on her Wisdom saving throw; despite her poor attack rolls and miserable Will saves, she is still quite capable of blasting her opponents to bits, whether these penalties are –10 or –100. Similarly, a fighter with a –10 penalty on Fortitude saving throws can still swing a sword, as can one with a –10 penalty to Armor Class; the fighter is still viable despite these penalties. "Depletable statistic" isn't an official game term, but it is a helpful concept when comparing power levels of spells—attacking depletable statistics is a war of attrition that can eventually wear down the target, whereas adding penalties to non-depletable statistics may have no effect at all, as the target may have other attacks that allow them to ignore those penalties.

See the part that says "Hit points, ability scores, and levels are all depletable statistics"?

This is as close to getting "damage" defined as I could find. Where did you see where the word "damage" is defined as meaning hit points only?


If it was a blanket deathward-like effect it would cost more than +1 armor bonus. That'd be a really strong ability.


I'm pretty sure RAI is that something that protects against 'damage' does not protect against 'attribute damage' - damage is assumed to be hit point damage unless otherwise stated.

I believe, however, that something like an attack from a Wraith

Quote:
Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)

would be rendered harmless by this armor, because the negative energy damage would be reduced to zero, which also blocks any 'rider' effects.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

poundpuppy30 wrote:
It doesn't say hit point damage

No it doesn't. This brings up a very long debate on which interpretation/meaning is in the rules:

damage is a term used to cover only hit point damage, and "ability damage" is a different term.

damage is an all encompassing term used to cover all things with adjectives to modify it, such as "ability damage".

There is no FAQ to answer this, and no rule to specify which. So it is ultimately an Ask your GM question.

However, I'd wager a cider on the future FAQ answer saying damage refers to only hit point damage and ability damage is a separate thing.


Damage is HP damage. Ability damage is separate and different from Damage.


Matthew Downie wrote:

I'm pretty sure RAI is that something that protects against 'damage' does not protect against 'attribute damage' - damage is assumed to be hit point damage unless otherwise stated.

I believe, however, that something like an attack from a Wraith

Quote:
Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)
would be rendered harmless by this armor, because the negative energy damage would be reduced to zero, which also blocks any 'rider' effects.

Even if it would protect against ability damage from negative or positive energy, it wouldn't protect against ability drain at all, since it only protects against damage. Ability drain and ability damage are two separate effects with specific in-game definitions.

For comparison, look at the Shadow's attack which specifies Str Damage.


Saldiven wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:

I'm pretty sure RAI is that something that protects against 'damage' does not protect against 'attribute damage' - damage is assumed to be hit point damage unless otherwise stated.

I believe, however, that something like an attack from a Wraith

Quote:
Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)
would be rendered harmless by this armor, because the negative energy damage would be reduced to zero, which also blocks any 'rider' effects.

Even if it would protect against ability damage from negative or positive energy, it wouldn't protect against ability drain at all, since it only protects against damage. Ability drain and ability damage are two separate effects with specific in-game definitions.

For comparison, look at the Shadow's attack which specifies Str Damage.

I believe he's referring to this section of the Damage Reduction entry in the Glossary:

Damage Reduction wrote:
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.

Whenever DR completely negates the damage from an attack, the riders on that attack do not go into effect, either.

Whether that's something that comes into play here is a separate matter. I doubt that was the intended function. Since it doesn't stop the less powerful attack of a Shadow (as you mentioned), it likely shouldn't stop the more powerful attack of a Wraith just because the Wraith's attack also includes a physical damage component as well.


fretgod99 wrote:
Saldiven wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:

I'm pretty sure RAI is that something that protects against 'damage' does not protect against 'attribute damage' - damage is assumed to be hit point damage unless otherwise stated.

I believe, however, that something like an attack from a Wraith

Quote:
Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)
would be rendered harmless by this armor, because the negative energy damage would be reduced to zero, which also blocks any 'rider' effects.

Even if it would protect against ability damage from negative or positive energy, it wouldn't protect against ability drain at all, since it only protects against damage. Ability drain and ability damage are two separate effects with specific in-game definitions.

For comparison, look at the Shadow's attack which specifies Str Damage.

I believe he's referring to this section of the Damage Reduction entry in the Glossary:

Damage Reduction wrote:
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.

Whenever DR completely negates the damage from an attack, the riders on that attack do not go into effect, either.

Whether that's something that comes into play here is a separate matter. I doubt that was the intended function. Since it doesn't stop the less powerful attack of a Shadow (as you mentioned), it likely shouldn't stop the more powerful attack of a Wraith just because the Wraith's attack also includes a physical damage component as well.

note too that it says "most". Of course if your DR negates the damage you would have taken from a poisoned dagger, theres no poison in you, same for disease, and the monks fist didnt make a good enough hit to stun you.

Would that apply to the wraith? Hard to say. depends on if the DM decides the ability damage is a result of negative energy to the muscles, or a seperate unrelated aspect of the touch. Personally id lean towards the former.


I tried to track down where I got that from, since it's not as clear as I thought - but all I found was that it's been in the FAQueue since 2011.


fretgod99 wrote:
Saldiven wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:

I'm pretty sure RAI is that something that protects against 'damage' does not protect against 'attribute damage' - damage is assumed to be hit point damage unless otherwise stated.

I believe, however, that something like an attack from a Wraith

Quote:
Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)
would be rendered harmless by this armor, because the negative energy damage would be reduced to zero, which also blocks any 'rider' effects.

Even if it would protect against ability damage from negative or positive energy, it wouldn't protect against ability drain at all, since it only protects against damage. Ability drain and ability damage are two separate effects with specific in-game definitions.

For comparison, look at the Shadow's attack which specifies Str Damage.

I believe he's referring to this section of the Damage Reduction entry in the Glossary:

Damage Reduction wrote:
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.

Whenever DR completely negates the damage from an attack, the riders on that attack do not go into effect, either.

Whether that's something that comes into play here is a separate matter. I doubt that was the intended function. Since it doesn't stop the less powerful attack of a Shadow (as you mentioned), it likely shouldn't stop the more powerful attack of a Wraith just because the Wraith's attack also includes a physical damage component as well.

This armor's ability is not Damage Reduction, which is also a specific ability with in game definitions. At no point does the special armor ability define itself as Damage Reduction.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Damage Reduction isn't the only type of damage reduction that stops 'rider' effects:
Ice Tomb Hex FAQ

Quote:
The general assumption for effects is if the creature negates the damage from the effect, the creature isn't subject to additional effects from that attack (such as DR negating the damage from a poisoned weapon, which means the creature isn't subject to the poison). Therefore, a cold-immune creature takes no damage from the hex and can't be imprisoned by it.

Silver Crusade

Matthew Downie if you check last line on that link you posted you would see this:

"Shadows don't drain levels either. Not everything with negative energy does.

But the Con drain is a rider on negative energy damage, with no other explanation offered about what could have caused that Con drain."

The strength damage that a shadow does says that it comes from negative energy effect, which is negative energy damage I would think since the shadow is made up of negative energy. It doesn't say the shadow has to damage you for the strength damage to take affect but instead the shadow only has to touch you.

"This armor protects its wearer from harmful ((negative)) and
positive ((energy)), including channeled energy. The armor
absorbs the first 10 points of positive or negative energy
damage per attack that the wearer would normally take."

It even says it protects against negative energy. From the wording I see the shadow as touching a person and the touch sending the negative energy into the victim to do strength damage to them. Since it's negative energy that is the cause of the strength damage the Deathless protects against it and the damage that is caused is going to strength(it could have been hp, stats.

Silver Crusade

"Even if it would protect against ability damage from negative or positive energy, it wouldn't protect against ability drain at all, since it only protects against damage. Ability drain and ability damage are two separate effects with specific in-game definitions.

For comparison, look at the Shadow's attack which specifies Str Damage."

Ability Drains and Ability Damage are two different things as far as recovering from them. Damage is easier to recover from since it needs lesser restoration spell while drains need restoration spells. Maybe they made this armor ability to help offset adventures that have shadows and people of low level can do something to battle them since buying magic weapons are hard at low levels let alone first level.

Silver Crusade

Imagine a shadow or even worse a greater shadow hitting you with a critical and then confirms on the critical. Wouldn't the shadow do strength damage twice? That has a chance to go over the 10 damage the Deathless protects you against.


The Deathless quality doesn't make you immune to all negative energy effects - the only protection it gives you is reducing the damage inflicted and sometimes preventing negative levels. Neither of these are relevant to Shadow attacks.

The (first) link I posted was talking about Death Ward, which says the subject "is immune to energy drain and any negative energy effects", which would include Shadow attacks.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Armor Ability Question All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.