Gallant Armor wrote: Lady-J wrote: if power attack couldn't work with non lethal you wouldn't be able to use it in the 1st place for it to "turn on" when non lethal becomes lethal Not true. The restriction from power attack only prevents the attacker from gaining the bonus damage from power attack, not from using power attack entirely. When attempting to deal nonlethal damage you can use power attack and take the penalty, but you won't gain the benefit if the damage dealt is nonlethal damage. the penalty to hit is tied to the dmg, if your not getting the damage your not getting the penalty to hit
Lady-J wrote: the penalty to hit is tied to the dmg, if your not getting the damage your not getting the penalty to hit No, that is utterly inaccurate. Nothing in the feat would suggest that to be true.
toastedamphibian wrote: Lady-J wrote: the penalty to hit is tied to the dmg, if your not getting the damage your not getting the penalty to hit No, that is utterly inaccurate. Nothing in the feat would suggest that to be true. You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls.
seems pretty self explanatory if you take the penalty to hit you get the boost to damage, if you aren't getting the boost to damage you don't take the penalty to hit
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pax Miles wrote: Gallant Armor wrote:
If you think that those passages make sense by your interpretation then you are deeply delusional.
Please refrain from accusations of insanity, and otherwise personally insulting phrases. They don't help these conversations and don't resolve anything. It's also hate speech against the mentally ill when you refer to mental illness as an insult. I have never heard the term delusional used in relation to mental illness, in my colloquial understanding it is equivalent to irrational. I apologize if I offended anyone as that was not my intention.
Lady-J wrote: toastedamphibian wrote: Lady-J wrote: the penalty to hit is tied to the dmg, if your not getting the damage your not getting the penalty to hit No, that is utterly inaccurate. Nothing in the feat would suggest that to be true. You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls.
seems pretty self explanatory if you take the penalty to hit you get the boost to damage, if you aren't getting the boost to damage you don't take the penalty to hit If your not going to get the damage bonus, you should not try to use the feat. But if circumstances should dictate you don't get to deal that damage (concealment, mirror image, illusion, damage immunity, hardness, incorporeality, simply missing...) you dont retroactively remove the penalty to hit. You can choose to use power attack before delivering an Inflict Light Wounds spell, and you will take a penalty on your attack roll. (Maybe you want the damage bonus for AoO's?) But you won't deal more negative energy damage.
Chemlak wrote: Okay, GA, mind if I ask what you are looking to gain from your possible interpretation of the rules?
Do you want us all to acknowledge that you have a deeper insight into the Pathfinder rules than the rest of us combined?
Do you want us to agree that the only way to read this rule is the way you have presented it?
Do you want us to march on Paizo’s office and demand that the design team stop designing 2E to focus on this one specific rule query that only a tiny proportion of the forum population are able to interpret in this one unusual way and even they acknowledge that it’s probably not what the design team intended but damnit that’s how the rule is written drop everything to agree that it’s badly worded?
If the answer to those questions is “no”, please tell us what you actually want (oh, and if the answer to that is “a FAQ and a fix” then please provide a FAQable question following the rules forum guidelines).
For some perspective, here’s a helpful link.
My goal with all of this is to hopefully have someone prove me wrong. Either with additional rules, FAQ, dev blog post or some other official (or officialish) source.
I would very much like to use the combination but I can't find justification for it being legal under the rules. The odds of an FAQ are likely low and no one has found anything new to bring to the discussion so we just keep going in circles. At this point I am mainly continuing this conversation as I find the interpretations of most of the posters to be bewildering.
I strongly believe that my interpretation of lethal, nonlethal and hit point damage to be correct, but I think it is possible or even likely that the use of it in power attack was not meant to lock out nonlethal damage. If there is interest in an FAQ I would strongly support it.
Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote:
If you think that those passages make sense by your interpretation then you are deeply delusional. By your reading if a creature has 20 points of nonlethal damage and receives 5 points of healing then they are healed for 10 points of nonlethal damage.
For clarity, I'm not going to respond to your specific example, but rather reiterate the formula for making that determination.
X nonlethal = X lethal
For the purposes of our conversation, we'll stick with relatively simple algebra and assume that within a given equation, X will always equal itself.
I agree that you don't always convert nonlethal to lethal, but when you do, it MUST always follow that formula. My point is that your rule interpretation creates a new formula.
X nonlethal = X+Y lethal
Do you have direct and explicit information from the rules text that backs you up on this? Because everything I see supports the first formula. It took me a few tries but I think I understand what you are saying. Your claim is that my interpretation is invalid as it allows for more lethal damage than could have been done nonlethally, is that correct?
The problem with your claim is that the bonus damage is conditional. With a conditional clause, the Y variable is always there it is just sometimes 0. An attack would only get that damage if it meets the conditions.
thaX wrote: GA.
When you convert Non Lethal damage to Lethal, the character is still doing Non-Lethal, it is the target that has no more Non Lethal to take.
They are attempting to deal nonlethal damage, but it is "treated as lethal damage" with no restrictions given. Since there are no restrictions given, for all intents and purposes it is lethal damage.
For example if an ability says "When you use this ability, the target is treated as flatfooted to your attacks for one round" then it is clear that your enemies are not flatfooted in general, only conditionally flatfooted to your attacks. If the ability said "When you use this ability, the target is treated as flatfooted for one round." there are no conditions given so the enemy would be flatfooted for all effects.
Gallant Armor wrote: I have never heard the term delusional used in relation to mental illness, in my colloquial understanding it is equivalent to irrational. I apologize if I offended anyone as that was not my intention. Thank you.
toastedamphibian wrote: Pax Miles wrote:
My level 1 Evil Fighter with a Greataxe and 18 strength decides to "non-lethally" attack a Toad just for the heck of it.
Lets Rock, punk. Just an example. No offense intended. ;D
Toads are a good example of creatures that could realistically die to non-lethal damage without the attacker intending to kill them. Though attacking a Toad even non-lethally, is certainly attacking a helpless creature, so I added the "evil" tag to my example fighter.
Gallant Armor wrote: thaX wrote: GA.
When you convert Non Lethal damage to Lethal, the character is still doing Non-Lethal, it is the target that has no more Non Lethal to take.
They are attempting to deal nonlethal damage, but it is "treated as lethal damage" with no restrictions given. Since there are no restrictions given, for all intents and purposes it is lethal damage. It matters in a few instances.
If the character has special DR against non-lethal damage. Very uncommon ability, but it does exist. For example, an Invulnerable Barbarian, at 2nd level, the class has DR 2/- against non-lethal damage specifically. This DR would still apply while the barbarian was unconscious due to max HP in non-lethal damage because they are being damaged non-lethally, even if the damage resolves as lethal damage in respects to HP loss.
It would also matter if the damage were being redirected, for example with Shield Other. In the case of shield other, the damage would be split as non-lethal, then applied to each target.
And it especially matters if the attack deals bonus damage via lethal or non-lethal damage. A merciful weapon, for example, deals additional damage when attacking non-lethally, even if it kills the target.
When a character receives damage, that damage is applied to a particular statistic. It can be either Ability Damage or HP Damage. If it is Ability Damage, it can be STR, DEX, CON, INT, WIS, or CHA damage. If it is HP damage, it can be lethal or non-lethal damage.
The current argument as I have read it is....
P1: Power Attack bonus damage does not apply to "touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage."
P2: Non-lethal damage is not "hit point damage."
C: Power Attack cannot be applied to non-lethal attacks.
Given this reasoning, I'd like to add that Deadly Aim cannot be used with non-lethal attacks.
P1: Deadly Aim bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.
P2: Non-lethal damage is not "hit point damage."
C: Deadly Aim cannot be applied to non-lethal damage.
Ok, so, I make a Fighter and get the following feats:
Deadly Aim (Lvl 1 Feat)
Far Shot (Fighter lvl 1 Bonus Feat)
Precise Shot (Human Bonus Feat)
Acute Shot (Lvl 2 Fighter Bonus Feat)
When he makes an attack with his +1 Longbow...
Attack Roll: +2 BAB +3 Dex = +5 Attack
Damage Roll: 1d8+2
He shoots at a target that is between 700-800 feet away. Can he use Deadly Aim while using Acute Shot? He is going to take -6 on his damage roll. If he rolls 1-4, the penalty to damage will reduce it to zero, which will make the attack deal 1 non-lethal damage. If he rolls 5-8, the attack will deal lethal damage.
Clearly, this is a horrible interpretation. The Bonus to the damage roll applies to any damage that is going to deal damage to the HP statistic. Of which, there are two varieties. Lethal and non-lethal.
Pax Miles wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: thaX wrote: GA.
When you convert Non Lethal damage to Lethal, the character is still doing Non-Lethal, it is the target that has no more Non Lethal to take.
They are attempting to deal nonlethal damage, but it is "treated as lethal damage" with no restrictions given. Since there are no restrictions given, for all intents and purposes it is lethal damage. It matters in a few instances.
If the character has special DR against non-lethal damage. Very uncommon ability, but it does exist. For example, an Invulnerable Barbarian, at 2nd level, the class has DR 2/- against non-lethal damage specifically. This DR would still apply while the barbarian was unconscious due to max HP in non-lethal damage because they are being damaged non-lethally, even if the damage resolves as lethal damage in respects to HP loss. This would depend on the order of operations which isn't clear based on the text. Does the target take nonlethal damage which is converted to lethal damage, or is the damage dealt by the weapon simply lethal damage? I would lean towards the second interpretation, but it is debatable.
Pax Miles wrote: It would also matter if the damage were being redirected, for example with Shield Other. In the case of shield other, the damage would be split as non-lethal, then applied to each target. ven if the damage resolves as lethal damage in respects to HP loss. Similar issue here. If the target is taking lethal damage, then it is lethal damage that will be split.
Pax Miles wrote: And it especially matters if the attack deals bonus damage via lethal or non-lethal damage. A merciful weapon, for example, deals additional damage when attacking non-lethally, even if it kills the target. I don't see how this relates to the question at hand as the excess damage would be treated as lethal as normal.
Mallecks wrote: When a character receives damage, that damage is applied to a particular statistic. It can be either Ability Damage or HP Damage. If it is Ability Damage, it can be STR, DEX, CON, INT, WIS, or CHA damage. If it is HP damage, it can be lethal or non-lethal damage.
The current argument as I have read it is....
P1: Power Attack bonus damage does not apply to "touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage."
P2: Non-lethal damage is not "hit point damage."
C: Power Attack cannot be applied to non-lethal attacks.
Given this reasoning, I'd like to add that Deadly Aim cannot be used with non-lethal attacks.
** spoiler omitted **
P1: Deadly Aim bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.
P2: Non-lethal damage is not "hit point damage."
C: Deadly Aim cannot be applied to non-lethal damage.
Ok, so, I make a Fighter and get the following feats:
Deadly Aim (Lvl 1 Feat)
Far Shot (Fighter lvl 1 Bonus Feat)
Precise Shot (Human Bonus Feat)
Acute Shot (Lvl 2 Fighter Bonus Feat)
When he makes an attack with his +1 Longbow...
Attack Roll: +2 BAB +3 Dex = +5 Attack
Damage Roll: 1d8+2
He shoots at a target that is between 700-800 feet away. Can he use Deadly Aim while using Acute Shot? He is going to take -6 on his damage roll. If he rolls 1-4, the penalty to damage will reduce it to zero, which will make the attack deal 1 non-lethal damage. If he rolls 5-8, the attack will deal lethal damage.
Clearly, this is a horrible interpretation. The Bonus to the damage roll applies to any damage that is going to deal damage to the HP statistic. Of which, there are two varieties. Lethal and non-lethal.
As stated near the start of the thread: Casting Conduit, Deadly Aim, Furious Spell, Piranha Strike, Power Attack, Take the Hit, and Divine Fighting Technique (Lamashtu's Carving) would not be able to be used with nonlethal damage by this reading.
Nonlethal damage specifically does not interact with the HP statistic as it is tracked separately, for that reason it is not hit point damage.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Gallant Armor wrote:
Pax Miles wrote: And it especially matters if the attack deals bonus damage via lethal or non-lethal damage. A merciful weapon, for example, deals additional damage when attacking ... I hate how the site cuts off long posts...
Regarding Merificul weapons, if you click the link (above) and read it, you'll note that the mericful weapon specially deals "All" non-lethal damage. If you rule that damage dealt is considered lethal "for all intents and purposes," then the weapon property is dysfunctional. It can't deal "all non-lethal damage" while dealing lethal damage and you've created a paradox.
So, roll to attack, roll damage, apply resistances/DR, determine damage taken, and then resolve the differrence between lethal and non-lethal.
If you resolve the damage taken in the same step as resolving the effects of non-lethal damage, the system starts breaking.
Comparing the effects of lethal damage with nonlethal damage.
With only damage of one type, this is how it stacks up:
Some lethal damage = full function
Some nonlethal damage = full function
lethal damage same as max hit points = staggered
nonlethal damage same as max hit points = staggered
lethal damage greater than max hit points = unconscious, dying
nonlethal damage greater than max hit points = unconscious, not dying
Nonlethal Damage wrote: Nonlethal damage represents harm to a character that is not life-threatening. Quacks like a duck, looks like a duck. Must be a duck.
Nonlethal damage is hit point damage. Just not lethal.
While you don't deduct it from your current hit points, you do track it against your current hit points. That does not make it not hit points.
Gallant Armor wrote: Pax Miles wrote: It would also matter if the damage were being redirected, for example with Shield Other. In the case of shield other, the damage would be split as non-lethal, then applied to each target. ven if the damage resolves as lethal damage in respects to HP loss. Similar issue here. If the target is taking lethal damage, then it is lethal damage that will be split.
Shield Other wrote: Additionally, the subject takes only half damage from all wounds and attacks (including those dealt by special abilities) that deal hit point damage Since you say nonlethal damage is not hit point damage, shield other does nothing at all for nonlethal damage. Do you think that is right? I sure don't.
/cevah
EDIT: Got the "not" before the wrong "dying"
Shield Other: Hadn't noticed that. Nonlethal attacks bypass shield other. Good to know.
(Which is to say that you have expanded the importance of the question, but not really clarified it any.)
Pax Miles wrote: Gallant Armor wrote:
Pax Miles wrote: And it especially matters if the attack deals bonus damage via lethal or non-lethal damage. A merciful weapon, for example, deals additional damage when attacking ... I hate how the site cuts off long posts...
Regarding Merificul weapons, if you click the link (above) and read it, you'll note that the mericful weapon specially deals "All" non-lethal damage. If you rule that damage dealt is considered lethal "for all intents and purposes," then the weapon property is dysfunctional. It can't deal "all non-lethal damage" while dealing lethal damage and you've created a paradox. There is no paradox. By the rules, any nonlethal damage over max hit points is treated as lethal damage. The damage from merciful is no different.
Pax Miles wrote: So, roll to attack, roll damage, apply resistances/DR, determine damage taken, and then resolve the differrence between lethal and non-lethal.
If you resolve the damage taken in the same step as resolving the effects of non-lethal damage, the system starts breaking.
I can see the logic there, it would likely fit the most use cases.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
toastedamphibian wrote: Shield Other: Hadn't noticed that. Nonlethal attacks bypass shield other. Good to know.
(Which is to say that you have expanded the importance of the question, but not really clarified it any.)
No it hasn't.
Nonlethal damage is a type of hit point damage, and so Shield Other works just fine. A FAQ is completely unnecessary. This is not a Frequently Asked Question, operative words being the F and A.
For 10 years everyone has been operating under the assumption that nonlethal damage is a type of hit point damage, and the dev's have been completely fine with that.
Cevah wrote: Comparing the effects of lethal damage with nonlethal damage.
With only damage of one type, this is how it stacks up:
Some lethal damage = full function
Some nonlethal damage = full function
lethal damage same as max hit points = staggered
nonlethal damage same as max hit points = staggered
lethal damage greater than max hit points = unconscious, not dying
nonlethal damage greater than max hit points = unconscious, dying
Nonlethal Damage wrote: Nonlethal damage represents harm to a character that is not life-threatening. Quacks like a duck, looks like a duck. Must be a duck.
Nonlethal damage is hit point damage. Just not lethal.
While you don't deduct it from your current hit points, you do track it against your current hit points. That does not make it not hit points.
Gallant Armor wrote: Pax Miles wrote: It would also matter if the damage were being redirected, for example with Shield Other. In the case of shield other, the damage would be split as non-lethal, then applied to each target. ven if the damage resolves as lethal damage in respects to HP loss. Similar issue here. If the target is taking lethal damage, then it is lethal damage that will be split.
Shield Other wrote: Additionally, the subject takes only half damage from all wounds and attacks (including those dealt by special abilities) that deal hit point damage Since you say nonlethal damage is not hit point damage, shield other does nothing at all for nonlethal damage. Do you think that is right? I sure don't.
/cevah
You can assert that nonlethal damage is hit point damage all you want, but that doesn't make it so. Hit point damage is clearly defined as damage that reduces current hit points, the fact that it is tracked in increments of hit points does not fulfill that condition. Trying to define a clearly defined term with esoteric examples does not change the written definition.
It is entirely possible that shield other was intended not to work with nonlethal damage as the term wounds is used which implies lethal damage.
If we were to assume nonlethal damage was in fact hit point damage that would cause some issues:
Effects of Nonlethal Damage
'Damage doesn’t slow you down until your current hit points reach 0 or lower. At 0 hit points, you’re disabled.
If your hit point total is negative, but not equal to or greater than your Constitution score, you are unconscious and dying.
When your negative hit point total is equal to your Constitution, you’re dead.'
Healing Nonlethal Damage
'You heal nonlethal damage at the rate of 1 hit point per hour per character level. When a spell or ability cures nonlethal damage, it also removes an equal amount of nonlethal damage.'
Weapon Rules
'All weapons deal nonlethal damage. This damage is subtracted from the current hit points.'
If we assume that nonlethal damage is hit point damage then nonlethal damage would actually reduce hit points in addition to being tracked separately. Nonlethal damage would also be healed twice over; 10 points of nonlethal damage could be healed with 5 points of healing. Overall, I take the inconvenience of a few options not working with nonlethal damage to invalidating core rules.
Gallant Armor wrote:
As stated near the start of the thread: Casting Conduit, Deadly Aim, Furious Spell, Piranha Strike, Power Attack, Take the Hit, and Divine Fighting Technique (Lamashtu's Carving) would not be able to be used with nonlethal damage by this reading.
Nonlethal damage specifically does not interact with... I tried to create a situation where something might be lethal / nonlethal before dice were rolled, but I realize now that the argument I presented is flawed.
In any case, if I attack someone with a non-lethal attack, but the target currently has non-lethal damage equal to their HP, then my attack would do lethal damage, and this Power Attack does apply?
While we are reading the damage section literally, temporary hitpoints block ability damage.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Gallant Armor wrote: If we assume that nonlethal damage is hit point damage then nonlethal damage would actually reduce hit points in addition to being tracked separately. Nonlethal damage would also be healed twice over; 10 points of nonlethal damage could be healed with 5 points of healing. Overall, I take the inconvenience of a few options not working with nonlethal damage to invalidating core rules. This isn't true at all. You keep saying it, but it's not true. Why are you lying?
toastedamphibian wrote: While we are reading the damage section literally, temporary hitpoints block ability damage. Unless you.... *drum roll*... realize that that whole section is talking about hit points, and hit point damage. The WHOLE SECTION.
Mallecks wrote: Gallant Armor wrote:
As stated near the start of the thread: Casting Conduit, Deadly Aim, Furious Spell, Piranha Strike, Power Attack, Take the Hit, and Divine Fighting Technique (Lamashtu's Carving) would not be able to be used with nonlethal damage by this reading.
Nonlethal damage specifically does not interact with... I tried to create a situation where something might be lethal / nonlethal before dice were rolled, but I realize now that the argument I presented is flawed.
In any case, if I attack someone with a non-lethal attack, but the target currently has non-lethal damage equal to their HP, then my attack would do lethal damage, and this Power Attack does apply? If their nonlethal damage was equal to their max HP, then yes Power Attack would apply.
toastedamphibian wrote: While we are reading the damage section literally, temporary hitpoints block ability damage. Interesting RAW interpretation. RAI is much clearer in that case given the surrounding text about hit points.
Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: If we assume that nonlethal damage is hit point damage then nonlethal damage would actually reduce hit points in addition to being tracked separately. Nonlethal damage would also be healed twice over; 10 points of nonlethal damage could be healed with 5 points of healing. Overall, I take the inconvenience of a few options not working with nonlethal damage to invalidating core rules. This isn't true at all. You keep saying it, but it's not true. Why are you lying? Because that is what the text would mean by your interpretation. If nonlethal damage was hit point damage then the text defining hit point damage would apply. You can't have it both ways, either it's hit point damage or it's not.
Gallant Armor wrote: Because that is what the text would mean by your interpretation. If nonlethal damage was hit point damage then the text defining hit point damage would apply. You can't have it both ways, either it's hit point damage or it's not. It does apply, but with specific rules that override how they are tracked.
.cevah
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: If we assume that nonlethal damage is hit point damage then nonlethal damage would actually reduce hit points in addition to being tracked separately. Nonlethal damage would also be healed twice over; 10 points of nonlethal damage could be healed with 5 points of healing. Overall, I take the inconvenience of a few options not working with nonlethal damage to invalidating core rules. This isn't true at all. You keep saying it, but it's not true. Why are you lying? Because that is what the text would mean by your interpretation. If nonlethal damage was hit point damage then the text defining hit point damage would apply. You can't have it both ways, either it's hit point damage or it's not. This is like debating with a flat earther.
Gallant Armor wrote:
If their nonlethal damage was equal to their max HP, then yes Power Attack would apply.
What happens if the their HP is at 1? My damage roll will 100% cause hit point damage, so I can use then right?
Cevah wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Because that is what the text would mean by your interpretation. If nonlethal damage was hit point damage then the text defining hit point damage would apply. You can't have it both ways, either it's hit point damage or it's not. It does apply, but with specific rules that override how they are tracked.
.cevah So your contention is that nonlethal damage is hit point damage even though it is never defined as such and that even though it is hit point damage it doesn't need to abide by any of the rules or text regarding hit point damage?
Mallecks wrote: Gallant Armor wrote:
If their nonlethal damage was equal to their max HP, then yes Power Attack would apply.
What happens if the their HP is at 1? My damage roll will 100% cause hit point damage, so I can use then right?
Nonlethal damage compared to max HP is what is important, once you breach that point, all further damage is treated as lethal damage and would work with any ability that requires hit point damage.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I can't even fathom how this is an argument....
Power attack works with non lethal... Period.
If I am unarmed and don't have improved unarmed strike I can only deal non lethal... I most definitely can power attack with my fist.
I'm dumbfounded by what I've read in this thread trying to prove otherwise.
Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: If we assume that nonlethal damage is hit point damage then nonlethal damage would actually reduce hit points in addition to being tracked separately. Nonlethal damage would also be healed twice over; 10 points of nonlethal damage could be healed with 5 points of healing. Overall, I take the inconvenience of a few options not working with nonlethal damage to invalidating core rules. This isn't true at all. You keep saying it, but it's not true. Why are you lying? Because that is what the text would mean by your interpretation. If nonlethal damage was hit point damage then the text defining hit point damage would apply. You can't have it both ways, either it's hit point damage or it's not. This is like debating with a flat earther. I wholeheartedly agree, I provide quotes, facts and evidence and you respond with opinions and interpretations that require a complete twisting of the truth in order to justify.
*Thelith wrote: I can't even fathom how this is an argument....
Power attack works with non lethal... Period.
If I am unarmed and don't have improved unarmed strike I can only deal non lethal... I most definitely can power attack with my fist.
I'm dumbfounded by what I've read in this thread trying to prove otherwise.
It's quite a simple argument:
*Power attack requires hit point damage for the bonus damage to apply
*Nonlethal damage is not hit point damage
*Therefore power attack does not work with nonlethal damage.
If you can refute either of the first two clauses with something justified by the rules you will have disproven the argument.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Nonlethal damage is contained within the hit point damage rules. Therefore, nonlethal damage is a subset of hit point damage.
"Healing Nonlethal Damage: You heal nonlethal damage at the rate of 1 hit point per hour per character level. "
Non-lethal defined as hit point damage.
Stop arguing. Please.
Irontruth wrote: Nonlethal damage is contained within the hit point damage rules. Therefore, nonlethal damage is a subset of hit point damage. Where are you seeing that? The PRD has them as separate subheadings under "Injury and Death".
*Thelith wrote: "Healing Nonlethal Damage: You heal nonlethal damage at the rate of 1 hit point per hour per character level. "
Non-lethal defined as hit point damage.
Stop arguing. Please.
How is that defining nonlethal damage as hit point damage? No one is disputing the fact that nonlethal damage is measured in hit points, the contentious issue is if "hit point damage" only refers to lethal damage or if it refers to nonlethal damage as well.
Every instance of hit point damage in the rules refers to lethal damage and makes no sense if you assume it to mean nonlethal damage.
Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Nonlethal damage is contained within the hit point damage rules. Therefore, nonlethal damage is a subset of hit point damage. Where are you seeing that? The PRD has them as separate subheadings under "Injury and Death". Outside of Nonlethal (since we're arguing over that), which section of "Injury and Death" doesn't deal with hit points?
*Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk* *Headdesk*
Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Nonlethal damage is contained within the hit point damage rules. Therefore, nonlethal damage is a subset of hit point damage. Where are you seeing that? The PRD has them as separate subheadings under "Injury and Death". Outside of Nonlethal (since we're arguing over that), which section of "Injury and Death" doesn't deal with hit points? Both temporary hit points and nonlethal damage have effects relating to hit points but with separate rules as to how they work. I have never argued the point that nonlethal damage is measured in hit points, but it is clear that it doesn't interact with hit points in the same way as lethal damage. Since the term "hit point damage" is used interchangeably with lethal damage, it shouldn't be applied to nonlethal damage without text explicitly saying to do so.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
That is why Non Lethal converts to lethal after it equal the target's max HP. So that the Lethality of the hit(s) can be tracked.
Ok, GA,
Look, if the target is full up, and non-lethal damage is done to him, the non-lethal damage would have to go to full hp, then convert to full hp for the lethal, then start going through the negative hp until the target dies. For those above early levels, that is a lot to go through to kill with Non Lethal Damage. (My earlier example of 10 hp, 10 con needing 30 hp of Non Lethal to die)
The reading you are clinging onto is simply a false interpretation. Perhaps it will change in the new version of PF to not track separately, or have Non Lethal be a part of Lethal damage and simply stop at 0 to knock the target out for a set amount of time, based on the Non Lethal damage dealt.
For now, though, it is as it is, and Power Attack works with both types of damage, or not at all. Which would you prefer?
thaX wrote: That is why Non Lethal converts to lethal after it equal the target's max HP. So that the Lethality of the hit(s) can be tracked.
Ok, GA,
Look, if the target is full up, and non-lethal damage is done to him, the non-lethal damage would have to go to full hp, then convert to full hp for the lethal, then start going through the negative hp until the target dies. For those above early levels, that is a lot to go through to kill with Non Lethal Damage. (My earlier example of 10 hp, 10 con needing 30 hp of Non Lethal to die)
The reading you are clinging onto is simply a false interpretation. Perhaps it will change in the new version of PF to not track separately, or have Non Lethal be a part of Lethal damage and simply stop at 0 to knock the target out for a set amount of time, based on the Non Lethal damage dealt.
For now, though, it is as it is, and Power Attack works with both types of damage, or not at all. Which would you prefer?
How is a plain reading of the text a false interpretation? How is someone supposed to know that the term "hit point damage" applies to nonlethal damage if the term exclusively is used to refer to lethal damage?
What do you mean by "Power Attack works with both types of damage, or not at all"? It very clearly works with lethal damage, there is no question of that.
Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Nonlethal damage is contained within the hit point damage rules. Therefore, nonlethal damage is a subset of hit point damage. Where are you seeing that? The PRD has them as separate subheadings under "Injury and Death". Outside of Nonlethal (since we're arguing over that), which section of "Injury and Death" doesn't deal with hit points? Both temporary hit points and nonlethal damage have effects relating to hit points but with separate rules as to how they work. I have never argued the point that nonlethal damage is measured in hit points, but it is clear that it doesn't interact with hit points in the same way as lethal damage. Since the term "hit point damage" is used interchangeably with lethal damage, it shouldn't be applied to nonlethal damage without text explicitly saying to do so. What part of the "Injury and Death" section doesn't deal with hit points? A simple, direct answer would be the most helpful for us to have this conversation. A simple and direct answer lets me know that you understand the point being made. Answering a different question means I don't know if you are understanding the thing I'm saying.
Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Nonlethal damage is contained within the hit point damage rules. Therefore, nonlethal damage is a subset of hit point damage. Where are you seeing that? The PRD has them as separate subheadings under "Injury and Death". Outside of Nonlethal (since we're arguing over that), which section of "Injury and Death" doesn't deal with hit points? Both temporary hit points and nonlethal damage have effects relating to hit points but with separate rules as to how they work. I have never argued the point that nonlethal damage is measured in hit points, but it is clear that it doesn't interact with hit points in the same way as lethal damage. Since the term "hit point damage" is used interchangeably with lethal damage, it shouldn't be applied to nonlethal damage without text explicitly saying to do so. What part of the "Injury and Death" section doesn't deal with hit points? A simple, direct answer would be the most helpful for us to have this conversation. A simple and direct answer lets me know that you understand the point being made. Answering a different question means I don't know if you are understanding the thing I'm saying. It all relates to hit points.
Gallant Armor wrote: Mallecks wrote: Gallant Armor wrote:
If their nonlethal damage was equal to their max HP, then yes Power Attack would apply.
What happens if the their HP is at 1? My damage roll will 100% cause hit point damage, so I can use then right?
Nonlethal damage compared to max HP is what is important, once you breach that point, all further damage is treated as lethal damage and would work with any ability that requires hit point damage. Ok, Char wants to attack NPC. NPC has 10 HP and 7 Nonlethal damage tracked. My attack does 1d6 Non-lethal. Can I use power attack? The attack has a 50% chance of being an attack that deals hit point damage. The decision must be made prior to the attack roll.
Mallecks wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Mallecks wrote: Gallant Armor wrote:
If their nonlethal damage was equal to their max HP, then yes Power Attack would apply.
What happens if the their HP is at 1? My damage roll will 100% cause hit point damage, so I can use then right?
Nonlethal damage compared to max HP is what is important, once you breach that point, all further damage is treated as lethal damage and would work with any ability that requires hit point damage. Ok, Char wants to attack NPC. NPC has 10 HP and 7 Nonlethal damage tracked. My attack does 1d6 Non-lethal. Can I use power attack? The attack has a 50% chance of being an attack that deals hit point damage. The decision must be made prior to the attack roll. You can always use power attack even if there is no chance of dealing the bonus damage from power attack.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
A not very effective 1st level fighter combatant who has power attack and a Str of 13 happens to be wielding a shortsword and is swinging it at a foe with ablative barrier on. So, he does 1d6+3 damage. I think we can all agree that if the die roll is a 3 or more, the subject takes 5 nonlethal damage and at least 1 point of lethal damage, and the ablative barrier spell loses 5 hp worth of effectiveness.
What happens on a roll of 1 on the damage die? How many point of damage does ablative barrier convert? How many hp of effectiveness does ablative barrier lose?
Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Gallant Armor wrote: Irontruth wrote: Nonlethal damage is contained within the hit point damage rules. Therefore, nonlethal damage is a subset of hit point damage. Where are you seeing that? The PRD has them as separate subheadings under "Injury and Death". Outside of Nonlethal (since we're arguing over that), which section of "Injury and Death" doesn't deal with hit points? Both temporary hit points and nonlethal damage have effects relating to hit points but with separate rules as to how they work. I have never argued the point that nonlethal damage is measured in hit points, but it is clear that it doesn't interact with hit points in the same way as lethal damage. Since the term "hit point damage" is used interchangeably with lethal damage, it shouldn't be applied to nonlethal damage without text explicitly saying to do so. What part of the "Injury and Death" section doesn't deal with hit points? A simple, direct answer would be the most helpful for us to have this conversation. A simple and direct answer lets me know that you understand the point being made. Answering a different question means I don't know if you are understanding the thing I'm saying. It all relates to hit points.
Is nonlethal damage.... damage?
|
