Found here or here, the Impossible Bloodline lists its capstone ability (i.e., level 20 bloodline power) as follows:
The wording regarding bleed effects, critical hits, and sneak attacks is peculiar. For bleed effects and sneak attack damage, I would infer that "no additional damage" would mean taking no damage from such effects (immunity to them, in other words).
However, how Living Paradox is meant to interact with critical hits seems slightly less clear. Of course, it seems plenty clear to me that a character with Living Paradox would still take damage from a critical hit, albeit only the damage that would be dealt by a non-critical hit.
Now, the question: Since Living Paradox seems to effectively grant immunity to sneak attack and bleed, as well as ignore extra damage from critical hits, does it (or should it) confer immunity to critical hits?
(Other input regarding the "no additional damage" clause of Living Paradox in regards to sneak attacks and bleed effects is, of course, welcome.)
Nope. As in, it says you take no additional damage, but it doesn't grant immunity.
That would also hold true for Sneak Attacks, I believe.
Thus, if the rogue catches you flat-footed with a critical from his bow, you take normal damage for a normal hit, but would still be subjected to both the reduced speed from Crippling Critical and the Dispelling from Dispelling Attack sneak attack.
Nope. As in, it says you take no additional damage, but it doesn't grant immunity.
That would also hold true for Sneak Attacks, I believe.
Thus, if the rogue catches you flat-footed with a critical from his bow, you take normal damage for a normal hit, but would still be subjected to both the reduced speed from Crippling Critical and the Dispelling from Dispelling Attack sneak attack.
First: Thanks, Anonymous Warrior.
The choice of wording for Living Paradox is such a sore disappointment...
You would think it would be like the Aberrant and Boreal capstones, that just simply say you get immunity to things (e.g., critical hits). Why mess with saying "you take no additional damage" from something? That could be misconstrued to mean you take no damage beyond what anyone else normally would, rendering the ability absolutely useless.
I must also question the argument that effects requiring successful sneak attacks would still function on a character with Living Paradox. I seem to recall that effects contingent on a specific damage (say sneak attack) do not trigger if that target does not take the required damage (e.g., no damage from sneak attack means no Dispelling Attack).
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).
With this in mind, does Living Paradox negating the critical damage and/or sneak attack damage (but not the regular weapon damage) change the effects that occur?
EDIT: tried to make wording better
Wasn't aware of the FAQ. I stand corrected, and with that FAQ, then yes: Living Paradox should cancel the additional effects of critical hits and sneak attacks. My mistake.
Wasn't aware of the FAQ. I stand corrected, and with that FAQ, then yes: Living Paradox should cancel the additional effects of critical hits and sneak attacks. My mistake.
Yeah, I had forgotten all about that FAQ until about an hour after starting the thread.
I'm glad to see someone else is interpreting it (with regards to this silly Living Paradox thing) the same way I am. It means I'm not entirely crazy...I think...
But what might happen with a Coup de Grace against a character with Living Paradox? Should the target be considered immune to crits, since all potential crits seem to act like normal hits against them (have no effects that trigger on a crit)?
EDIT: grammar
My initial guess would be that it would grant immunity to Coup de Grace as well, but then we just established that we're both equally crazy (or maybe that's not how logic works. I forget.)
At any rate, the good news is that this is definitely in the realm of house rules: it's not like a capstone ability would ever come up in organized play, so applying the soundest logic that can be mustered IS the correct answer.