Except, we know that Nonlethal damage rolls CAN do hit point damage. It says in the nonlethal damage rules, to treat all overflow as lethal damage.
If you don't add Power Attack, than you are treating that overflow damage as something like lethal damage light, some new category that acts just like lethal damage, but isn't eligible for certain bonuses that normally apply to lethal damage.
Power Attack applies to lethal damage. If nonlethal is TREATED JUST LIKE LETHAL, than Power Attack must be applied to it as well, otherwise you are NOT treating it like lethal.
Do you have a source that says that nonlethal overflow is treated the same as lethal... except in [blank] circumstances?
or
Do you have a source that says that Power Attack does not apply to all lethal damage?
1. Nonlethal damage rolls never do lethal damage. The target takes nonlethal damage from the attack, then treats any excess as lethal damage.
2. This claim you are making creates attacks that deal lethal and nonlethal damage simultaneously. Please describe how this interacts with Invulnerable Rager's DR.Rager has 20 HP, DR2/-, DR4/lethal and 16 nonlethal damage.
I make another attack roll for 10 nonlethal damage. What happens?
Last Edit:
To recap, interpreting nonlethal damage as something other than hit point damage has one of two results.
1) It causes damage calculations to function in an awkward way that has never been clarified once in the history of the game in the 10 previous years that it existed.or
2) It creates a new category of damage that is treated like lethal damage, except that it isn't treated like lethal damage.
1. Your interpretation of nonlethal overflow works causes problems on its own, whether or not nonlethal damage is considered hit point damage or not.
2. It doesn't create a new category, we just disagree on when / how the conversion happens.
1. Nonlethal damage rolls never do lethal damage.
The rulebook clearly states that this is wrong. The quote has been printed multiple times.
At this point, either you're dumb or trolling.
|
I can tell you, in PFS there is no question about this. Non Lethal damage effects HP and how much you have before being KTFO. The tracks are used in an effort to make it easy to keep track of and determine when the target passes out.
Yes, for the umpteenth time, it is HP damage. This should never have been a question.
But . . . but . . .
1. Choose to Use Power Attack
2. Make a nonlethal melee attack roll
3. Attack succeeds
4. Roll for damage. [Example: Power Attack happens here. 1d4+2]
5. Damage is modified by spells, effects, abilities [Example: Damage Reduction, Ablative Barrier, etc.]
6. Applied to target.
The difference between our opinions, is that you think nonlethal damage conversion happens at step 4. As soon as the damage exists, it is instantaneously changes to lethal if it overflows the target's max HP.
I think that nonlethal damage conversion happens at step 6. The damage conversion is something that the victim of the attack does.
Let's look at some situations.
Nonlethal attack against a character that has 10 HP and 8 nonlethal damage.
Situation 1: Lethal and Nonlethal
1. You make a nonlethal attack roll.
2. You roll 4 damage. According to you, this is 2 lethal and 2 nonlethal damage.
3. The target takes 2 lethal and 2 nonlethal damage.
Is this a Lethal or Nonlethal attack? Your argument creates an attack where something is both lethal and nonlethal at the same time. I'm not sure if this is necessarily problematic, but I just think logically there's a problem where something is A and Not A at the same time.
Situation 2: Post Damage Reduction. If you think damage reduction happens after damage assignment...
Lvl 2 Invulnerable Rager.
20 HP, DR4/lethal, DR2/-, 18 nonlethal damage.
1. You make a nonlethal attack roll.
2. You roll 10 damage. This becomes 2 nonlethal, and 8 lethal.
3. How do you apply your damage reduction? Do you double dip? Block 2 of the nonlethal and 2 of the lethal? Do you only block up to the max of the ability, which would be 2 nonlethal and 1 lethal? Do you only block 1 of the 2? If so, which do you block first the lethal or the nonlethal? Why that choice?
Situation 3: Pre Damage Reduction. If you believe damage reduction happens before damage assignment...
Enemy has 10 HP, 8 nonletahl, DR 5/-.
1. Use Power attack
2. You make a nonlethal attack roll.
3. You roll 10 damage.
4. DR is applied. It drops to 5 damage.
5. Damage is calculated to 2 nonlethal and 5 lethal (3 converted + 2 power attack).
The problem with the above process is the repercussions for lethal damage...
1. Use Power attack
2. Make a lethal attack roll.
3. You roll 5 damage.
4. DR is applied. It drops to 0 damage.
5. Damage is calculated to 0 damage. (No Power Attack because the effect has zero hit point damage.)
Situation 4: Adjustments to attack rolls
10 HP, 8 nonlethal damage
1. Make a nonlethal Attack roll with a Sap
2. Deal 4 damage. 2 lethal, 2 nonlethal.
...
Wait a second, you did lethal damage with your Sap. In order to do lethal damage with your sap, you have to take a -4 to your attack roll. Now, the attack roll no longer beats the target's AC and the attacker misses. If only you had rolled 2 or less damage!
Situation 4 is similar to the argument that you are making against Power Attack not being added to nonlethal damage. To prove it, I will take what you said previously and swap out some terms.
Except, we know that SAPS CAN do LETHAL DAMAGE. It says in the nonlethal damage rules, to TAKE -4 TO YOUR ATTACK ROLL
If you don't APPLY THE NONLETHAL WEAPON TO DEAL LETHAL DAMAGE PENALTY, than you are treating that overflow damage as something like lethal damage light, some new category that acts just like lethal damage, but isn't eligible for certain PENALTIES that normally apply to lethal damage.
LETHAL DAMAGE PENALTY applies to lethal damage. If nonlethal is TREATED JUST LIKE LETHAL, than LETHAL DAMAGE PENALTY must be applied to it as well, otherwise you are NOT treating it like lethal.
Do you have a source that says that nonlethal overflow is treated the same as lethal... except in [blank] circumstances?
or
Do you have a source that says that LETHAL WEAPON ATTACK PENALTY does not apply to all lethal damage FROM SAPS
This argument is from post 150 of this topic, in case anyone wants to check and see if I made any changes that were not in good faith.
You're forgetting one key detail.
I don't believe any of this. I know that nonlethal damage is actually hit point damage... and none of this conversation actually matters. I'm pointing out what is messed up about YOUR argument.
If you figure out a solution to your sap problem, let me know. It seems like another doozy. Another interesting wrinkle in trying to convince everyone else that nonlethal damage isn't hit point damage.
Edit: Also, I'm not seeing a source on when lethal damage doesn't qualify for Power Attack. So that issue is also outstanding. Good luck!
The Sap Problem exists independently of whether or not nonlethal damage is hit point damage. It shows that your argument against nonlethal attacks doing nonlethal damage is logically inconsistent.
Treating all nonlethal attacks as dealing nonlethal damage is logically consistent in all situations. Nonlethal damage is converted by the target AFTER they take the damage. If the target of the attack never takes the nonlethal damage, there is nothing to convert.
Lvl 2 Invulnerable Rager.
20 HP, DR4/lethal, DR2/-, 18 nonlethal damage.
1. You make a nonlethal attack roll.
2. You roll 10 damage. This becomes 2 nonlethal, and 8 lethal.
3. How do you apply your damage reduction? Do you double dip? Block 2 of the nonlethal and 2 of the lethal? Do you only block up to the max of the ability, which would be 2 nonlethal and 1 lethal? Do you only block 1 of the 2? If so, which do you block first the lethal or the nonlethal? Why that choice?Level 2? So how's he getting DR 4?
Invulnerability (Ex): At 2nd level, the invulnerable rager gains DR/— equal to half her barbarian level. This damage reduction is doubled against nonlethal damage. This ability replaces uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, and damage reduction.He has DR1/- which double to DR2/non-lethal.
You do 10 non-lethal, reduced to 8. 2 of those bring the non-lethal to above total HP, which means that 6 of them are lethal (meaning he has 14 current hit points, but is unconscious).
As I see non-lethal as a form of HP damage, there is no need to double on the damage reduction because it has already happened on the initial attack. Since the attack was non-lethal that's what the damage reduction is applied to. The overflow is because the attack was so powerful that even though it was intended to be non-lethal, it's now becoming lethal.
You're right, I messed up the DR. However, that's a minor point.
If you believe damage reduction happens before the conversion, please see Situation 3. I wasn't exactly sure IronTruth's stance on DR, and people have been claiming different things, so I included examples where converting the nonlethal to lethal damage happens before and after the damage reduction.
What Hit Points Represent: Hit points mean two things in the game world: the ability to take physical punishment and keep going , and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one.
...
Nonlethal damage represents harm to a character that is not life-threatening. Unlike normal damage, nonlethal damage is healed quickly with rest
...
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 hit point damage, it also removes an equal amount of nonlethal damage.
...
If your attack succeeds, you deal damage. The type of weapon used determines the amount of damage you deal.
...
Damage reduces a target's current hit points.
...
Minimum Damage: If penalties reduce the damage result to less than 1, a hit still deals 1 point of nonlethal damage.
...
All weapons deal hit point damage.
...
Effects of Hit Point 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.
...
Instead, when your nonlethal damage equals your current hit points, you're staggered (see below), and when it exceeds your current hit points, you fall unconscious.
Example 1: Says nothing about the term "hit point damage."
Example 2: Says nothing about the term "hit point damage."
Example 3: I have stated multiple times that nonlethal damage is damage that is measured in the unit of hit points. This is the major point of those supporting that nonlethal damage is hit point damage. However, being "measured in hit points" is not the same as being "hit point damage." Here, we will just have to agree to disagree. As we are both looking for the same thing from each other, a statement that defines nonlethal damage clearly, and we haven't found one.
Example 4: "Hit point damage" not used here. Weapons deal damage. Nonlethal damage is certainly damage. However, even if it said hit point damage, there are special rules to handle nonlethal damage.
Example 5: There are special rules for nonlethal damage. They are explicitly defined as not reducing hit points.
Example 6: Hit Point damage not used here. Even if it did, there are special rules that handle nonlethal damage.
Example 7: All weapons deal hit point damage is a general rule. There is a specific rule that handles nonlethal damage.
Example 8: Nonlethal damage doesn't reduce your hit points. Also, when your nonlethal damage equals your current HP, you are not disabled.
Example 9: Nonlethal damage has zero impact on your remaining HP. It certainly causes changes to your character, but not to your HP statistic.
If you are at 10 HP, no matter how much nonlethal damage you have, you will be at 10 HP. This is how we can see nonlethal damage doesn't effect your HP.
If someone were to say that excess nonlethal reduces HP, I would say that it ONLY happens because you treat excess nonlethal as lethal (which reduces HP, among other differences.)
You're right, I messed up the DR. However, that's a minor point.If you believe damage reduction happens before the conversion, please see Situation 3. I wasn't exactly sure IronTruth's stance on DR, and people have been claiming different things, so I included examples where converting the nonlethal to lethal damage happens before and after the damage reduction.
Enemy has 10 HP, 8 nonletahl, DR 5/-.1. Use Power attack
2. You make a nonlethal attack roll.
3. You roll 10 damage.
4. DR is applied. It drops to 5 damage.
5. Damage is calculated to 2 nonlethal and 5 lethal (3 converted + 2 power attack).The problem with the above process is the repercussions for lethal damage...
1. Use Power attack
2. Make a lethal attack roll.
3. You roll 5 damage.
4. DR is applied. It drops to 0 damage.
5. Damage is calculated to 0 damage. (No Power Attack because the effect has zero hit point damage.)
Not sure I follow why it's a problem. It can still be doing HP damage even if the DR reduces it to 0. Why? Well, that's easy
Sometimes damage reduction represents instant healing.So they did the damage but was instantly healed via DR.
And while you may think the misreading of the DR is a minor point, it does point to a misreading, and you have still not provided a rebuttal for the multitude of ways in which non-lethal and lethal damage interact with Hit Points as I have pointed out in post #154
Example 1: The barbarian was stabbed, but he is so tough he can just shake off the damage.
Example 2: The cleric was stabbed. He could feel the divine power of his deity flowing through him, healing some of the wounds.
That just describes how DR happens. Not every creature would heal through "instant healing" of the wounds. So, as long as it isn't "that type" of DR it works?
Attacks that deal no damage because of the target's damage reduction do not disrupt spells.
So, if the the target were casting a spell and they "healed the damage" as DR, do they have to make a concentration check? Because, it still did HP damage.
|
DR is applied to the damage before any of the damage has been applied to the character. It only gets applied once, otherwise you start double dipping. Say a Barbarian has DR 1 Lethal/2 Nonlethal. He has 20 hit points and hasn't taken any damage yet. He gets hit for 25 points of non-lethal damage. 2 of the nonlethal damage gets subtracted due to DR, leaving 23 nonlethal damage that gets applied to the barb. so the barb gets 20 points of non-lethal, gets knocked out, and 3 points of overflow damage.
The Sap Problem exists independently of whether or not nonlethal damage is hit point damage. It shows that your argument against nonlethal attacks doing nonlethal damage is logically inconsistent.
Treating all nonlethal attacks as dealing nonlethal damage is logically consistent in all situations. Nonlethal damage is converted by the target AFTER they take the damage. If the target of the attack never takes the nonlethal damage, there is nothing to convert.
Except the rules tell us this isn't true.
Nonlethal damage that exceeds the targets hit points is treated as lethal damage. It is plain as day in the rules. It isn't ambiguous at all. The rules literally tell us to treat nonlethal like lethal in certain situations.
Please stop trolling.
The conversion of nonlethal damage to lethal damage does not apply to the result of a nonlethal damage roll. It applies to nonlethal damage taken by a creature. These are two independent statistics.
Again, the position you are taking causes many problems that you refuse to address. So, it seems like only one of us trolling.
|
|
So we are past GA's little point and going into what is or is not Non Lethal as a particular point in time?
Listen, both of ya all. The attack is a Non Lethal attack. Period. When the target has no more Non Lethal to take, that is when he begins to take "normal" lethal damage from the rest of the attack. Nothing changes about how the attacker hit the target, just what the target can take and how he takes it. GA already admitted that this has little to do with his stance on Non Lethal damage and how it is not damage at all, or ... you know... something...
The conversion of nonlethal damage to lethal damage does not apply to the result of a nonlethal damage roll. It applies to nonlethal damage taken by a creature. These are two independent statistics.
Again, the position you are taking causes many problems that you refuse to address. So, it seems like only one of us trolling.
Where in the rules does it say that the damage an attack does is separate from the damage a target takes? What page will I find that on?
The Sap Problem exists independently of whether or not nonlethal damage is hit point damage. It shows that your argument against nonlethal attacks doing nonlethal damage is logically inconsistent.
Treating all nonlethal attacks as dealing nonlethal damage is logically consistent in all situations. Nonlethal damage is converted by the target AFTER they take the damage. If the target of the attack never takes the nonlethal damage, there is nothing to convert.
Except the rules tell us this isn't true.
Nonlethal damage that exceeds the targets hit points is treated as lethal damage. It is plain as day in the rules. It isn't ambiguous at all. The rules literally tell us to treat nonlethal like lethal in certain situations.
Please stop trolling.
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.When the damage from a nonlethal attack is rolled it is nonlethal regardless of the state of overflow damage. The sentence "If a creature’s nonlethal damage is equal to his total maximum hit points (not his current hit points), all further nonlethal damage is treated as lethal damage." should be parsed as 'If a creature’s nonlethal damage is equal to his total maximum hit points (not his current hit points), all further nonlethal damage the creature takes is treated as lethal damage.' Any overflow damage from nonlethal gets treated as lethal but the damage roll has already been made at this point. The nonlethal attack didn't qualify for power attack and therefore the bonus damage wasn't added.
Simply put, a nonlethal attack is not an effect that deals lethal damage for these purposes. If the phrasing was 'The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or attacks that do not deal hit point damage.' I could see your point. As is, it is referring to the effect level, not the target level.
The implication of your ruling here is that there is lethal damage that Power Attack doesn't apply to. Where in Power Attack does it say that it doesn't apply to lethal damage? Because for what you are saying to be true, there must be a category of lethal damage that Power Attack doesn't apply to. I'm waiting for a clear rules citation, not a vague interpretation.
Oh wait, I see it now. It's on page 577.
Where in the rules does it say that the damage an attack does is separate from the damage a target takes? What page will I find that on?The conversion of nonlethal damage to lethal damage does not apply to the result of a nonlethal damage roll. It applies to nonlethal damage taken by a creature. These are two independent statistics.
Again, the position you are taking causes many problems that you refuse to address. So, it seems like only one of us trolling.
There are a few things that modify the amount of damage a target takes. There is no specific rule, it is case specific. Each has its own rules. I have provided several examples that you have already ignored, but I will provide another.
Example:
A character attacks a target that has DR 5/-.
1. The character makes his attack roll and succeeds.
2. The character rolls damage (2d6+3) and gets 10 damage.
3. The damage is applied to the target.
4. The damage is modified by damage reduction.
5. The character takes 5 damage.
At step 2, the character rolls 10 damage. However, the target only takes 5 damage.
The implication of your ruling here is that there is lethal damage that Power Attack doesn't apply to. Where in Power Attack does it say that it doesn't apply to lethal damage? Because for what you are saying to be true, there must be a category of lethal damage that Power Attack doesn't apply to. I'm waiting for a clear rules citation, not a vague interpretation.
Oh wait, I see it now. It's on page 577.
This argument is invalid as per the "Sap Problem."
Edit: If you are just joining us (unlikely), the Sap Problem was presented in post 158.
I just nonlethally Power Attacked my pants. If you know what I mean. (Must've been that third burrito.)
Nonlethal damage is a form of damage.
It is tracked against a characters hit points.
Nonlethal is hit point damage.
...The Sap Problem exists independently of whether or not nonlethal damage is hit point damage. It shows that your argument against nonlethal attacks doing nonlethal damage is logically inconsistent.
Treating all nonlethal attacks as dealing nonlethal damage is logically consistent in all situations. Nonlethal damage is converted by the target AFTER they take the damage. If the target of the attack never takes the nonlethal damage, there is nothing to convert.
Except the rules tell us this isn't true.
Nonlethal damage that exceeds the targets hit points is treated as lethal damage. It is plain as day in the rules. It isn't ambiguous at all. The rules literally tell us to treat nonlethal like lethal in certain situations.
Please stop trolling.
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.When the damage from a nonlethal attack is rolled it is nonlethal regardless of the state of overflow damage. The sentence "If a creature’s nonlethal damage is equal to his total maximum hit points (not his current hit points), all further nonlethal damage is treated as lethal damage." should be parsed as 'If a creature’s nonlethal damage is equal to his total maximum hit points (not his current hit points), all further nonlethal damage the creature takes is treated as lethal damage.' Any overflow damage from nonlethal gets treated as lethal but the damage roll has already been made at this point. The nonlethal attack didn't qualify for power attack and therefore the bonus damage wasn't added.
Simply put, a nonlethal attack is not an effect that deals lethal damage for these purposes. If the phrasing was 'The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or attacks that do not deal hit point damage.' I could see your point. As is, it is referring to the
You've stated your opinion many, many times. You have not shown concrete evidence. You take words and assign them meaning that they do not have.
Where in the rules does it say that the damage a creature takes is different from the damage that was dealt? Where does it ACTUALLY say that? I don't want to know where you have deciphered the hidden meaning, but I want to know where the words of the core book ACTUALLY say it.
The implication of your ruling here is that there is lethal damage that Power Attack doesn't apply to. Where in Power Attack does it say that it doesn't apply to lethal damage? Because for what you are saying to be true, there must be a category of lethal damage that Power Attack doesn't apply to. I'm waiting for a clear rules citation, not a vague interpretation.
Oh wait, I see it now. It's on page 577.
This argument is invalid as per the "Sap Problem."
Edit: If you are just joining us (unlikely), the Sap Problem was presented in post 158.
The "Sap Problem" is a flaw in treating nonlethal damage as not hit point damage. It is a flaw resulting from your attempts to read things into the rules that aren't there. I'm super glad you found it, as it is further evidence that your viewpoint on the rules is flawed.
I already told you how the issue with saps isn't actually an issue. In fact, I told you before you brought it up. The thing is though, that you don't really pay attention the things I say, or the words in the rule book, so they get past you really easily. This has happened since basically the first post you responded to me by trying to claim I had not read the Dying condition, but where I schooled the shit out of you by how obvious it was that you had not read the Dead condition.
You ignore things if they don't support the point you want to make. You have a pattern of doing this.
The "Sap Problem" is a flaw in treating nonlethal damage as not hit point damage. It is a flaw resulting from your attempts to read things into the rules that aren't there. I'm super glad you found it, as it is further evidence that your viewpoint on the rules is flawed.I already told you how the issue with saps isn't actually an issue. In fact, I told you before you brought it up. The thing is though, that you don't really pay attention the things I say, or the words in the rule book, so they get past you really easily. This has happened since basically the first post you responded to me by trying to claim I had not read the Dying condition, but where I schooled the s*@! out of you by how obvious it was that you had not read the Dead condition.
You ignore things if they don't support the point you want to make. You have a pattern of doing this.
The "Sap Problem"exists as a result of YOUR interpretation of how nonlethal damage conversion happens. It exists independently of whether we use the "Nonlethal damage is hit point damage" or "Nonlethal damage is not hit point damage" viewpoint.
I was using the "Sap Problem" as an example of why your nonlethal damage conversion argument is logically inconsistent, and thus introduces new problems.
Examples:
Target has 10 HP and 8 nonlethal damage.
Nonlethal damage is considered hit point damage.
1. Creature makes attack with sap.
2. Rolls 4 damage. 2 Lethal and 2 Nonlethal.
The attack was used to deal lethal damage and thus should have been given a -4 penalty.
Nonlethal damage is not considered hit point damage.
1. Creature makes attack with sap
2. Rolls 4 damage. 2 Lethal and 2 Nonlethal
The attack as used to deal lethal damage and thus should have been given a -4 penalty to attack.
The actual discussion is where conversion is happening.
Nonlethal Damage conversion happens on attack
1. Creature makes attack with sap.
2. Creature does 2 lethal and 2 nonlethal
This is the Sap Problem, using the exact same argument you used against nonlethal damage conversion. Showing it is logically inconsistent.
Nonlethal Damage conversion happens after the attack
1. Creature makes attack with sap.
2. Rolls 4 nonlethal damage.
3. Target takes 4 nonlethal damage, but treats 2 of it as lethal damage.
This is approach is logically consistent for the attack roll and for the damage roll. It also doesn't create something that is A and NOT A at the same time. [Lethal and Nonlethal]
I don't believe I am ignoring anything. Please feel free to bring it up. At this point though, you provide a point that has been discussed already, and say that I am ignoring it. Then I respond with why I disagree with it and you say that I am ignoring it again. I try to answer everyone, but it's possible that I missed something. If you feel that I have ignored or missed any of your points, please feel free to present them and I will address them.
Speaking of which, you still haven't responded to the other situations from post 158 (where I introduced the Sap Problem) or continued the discussion from post 172 where I showed an example where the result of a damage roll is an independent statistic than the damage a creature will take. (Though many times, the two have the same value.)
The "Sap Problem" is a flaw in treating nonlethal damage as not hit point damage. It is a flaw resulting from your attempts to read things into the rules that aren't there. I'm super glad you found it, as it is further evidence that your viewpoint on the rules is flawed.I already told you how the issue with saps isn't actually an issue. In fact, I told you before you brought it up. The thing is though, that you don't really pay attention the things I say, or the words in the rule book, so they get past you really easily. This has happened since basically the first post you responded to me by trying to claim I had not read the Dying condition, but where I schooled the s*@! out of you by how obvious it was that you had not read the Dead condition.
You ignore things if they don't support the point you want to make. You have a pattern of doing this.
The "Sap Problem"exists as a result of YOUR interpretation of how nonlethal damage conversion happens. It exists independently of whether we use the "Nonlethal damage is hit point damage" or "Nonlethal damage is not hit point damage" viewpoint.
I was using the "Sap Problem" as an example of why your nonlethal damage conversion argument is logically inconsistent, and thus introduces new problems.
Examples:
Target has 10 HP and 8 nonlethal damage.
Nonlethal damage is considered hit point damage.
1. Creature makes attack with sap.
2. Rolls 4 damage. 2 Lethal and 2 Nonlethal.The attack was used to deal lethal damage and thus should have been given a -4 penalty.
Nonlethal damage is not considered hit point damage.
1. Creature makes attack with sap
2. Rolls 4 damage. 2 Lethal and 2 NonlethalThe attack as used to deal lethal damage and thus should have been given a -4 penalty to attack.
The actual discussion is where conversion is happening.
Nonlethal Damage conversion happens on attack
1. Creature makes attack with sap.
2. Creature does 2 lethal and 2...
No, it doesn't exist with "nonlethal damage is hit points damage" at all. Your examples are bogus and based an a faulty understanding of the rules.
I've already explained the difference between an attack roll and a damage roll, but you didn't get it. I'm not sure how to explain it again. What part of it do you not understand?
Also, 172 is my post. Not yours. You get confused a lot it seems.
Okay, here's your solution to the sap problem.
Where have I claimed that nonlethal damage should be treated like a lethal attack?
I mean, I understand how you are making this mistake, because you think attack rolls are the same as damage rolls, but it is SUPER OBVIOUS that this is the mistake you are making. You keep making it, and act like your mistake is proof of something (other than that you're making a mistake).
If we were discussing math, and I said "Let's assume that 2 multiplied by 2 equals 7, then that clearly proves my point about..." you would immediately know that I'm off my rocker and don't understand how math works.
When you try to assert that attack rolls are damage rolls, you sound like that.
You're right. I miscounted, it is post 173.
It is the same argument you are using for nonlethal damage conversion. Here, watch...
Okay, here's your solution to the sap problem.
Where have I claimed that NONLETHAL DAMAGE ROLLS should be treated like THEY CONVERT THE EXCESS NONLETHAL DAMAGE THE TARGETS TAKE?
I mean, I understand how you are making this mistake, because you think DAMAGE roll CONVERT THE EXCESS NONLETHAL DAMAGE THE TARGETS TAKE, but it is SUPER OBVIOUS that this is the mistake you are making. You keep making it, and act like your mistake is proof of something (other than that you're making a mistake).
If we were discussing math, and I said "Let's assume that 2 multiplied by 2 equals 7, then that clearly proves my point about..." you would immediately know that I'm off my rocker and don't understand how math works.
When you try to assert that DAMAGE rolls are actually CONVERTING THE NONLETHAL DAMAGE TO LETHAL DAMAGE, you sound like that.
Damage rolls do not "know" and do not need to "know" any information about their targets.
If I use metamagic to make a spell do nonlethal damage, and some of the targets have excess nonlethal damage and some of them don't. Which types of damage do we deal? Do we look at one target who takes some lethal and some nonlethal and apply that to everybody? Or maybe, the spell does nonlethal damage, and each recipient of damage modifies / converts the nonlethal damage as is appropriate to their current stats.
The rule doesn't say "convert". It says "treat".
You keep making super basic errors. It is these errors that lead you to wrong conclusions.
Also, I'm still waiting on a rules citation that says Power Attack doesn't apply to certain kinds of lethal damage.
|
|
Irontruth. This is supposing that GA's reading of the rules makes it so that Non Lethal damage is not eligible for Power Attack and other things focused on damage to a target. Hit Points come into play as some point, but I am not sure how lethal damage is targeted to be the only HP damage and Non Lethal is suddenly this new pool of points (Stamina?) that has nothing to do with HP.
If we discount this rogue theory of GA's, and looked at both Lethal and Non Lethal as Damage to the target, damage that effects HP, and concede that both work the same for feats and abilities, then the whole conversation about Non-Lethal being Lethal at a point is moot. The only reason it makes a difference in this conversation is the flawed reading of Non Lethal damage somehow turning into something other than HP, like say, lets call it Stamina.
Sadly though he is adamant that unless the DEV team comes down or some one can give "proof" (concrete, irrefutable, and with no possibly other interpretation) that reading is just a valid as any other. So people have been trying to show the flaws in said argument and humorously this has led to people thinking those highlighting the flaws are actually arguing the flaws.
The rule doesn't say "convert". It says "treat".
You keep making super basic errors. It is these errors that lead you to wrong conclusions.
Also, I'm still waiting on a rules citation that says Power Attack doesn't apply to certain kinds of lethal damage.
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. This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (–50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon.When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the bonus to damage increases by +2.
You must choose to use this feat before making an attack roll, and its effects last until your next turn. The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.
Power Attack gives +2 damage to the damage roll [If it does hit point damage.]
In order for a creature to treat nonlethal damage as lethal damage, it must first have the excess nonlethal to treat it at lethal .
When power attack conditions are checked, the damage from the roll is nonlethal and hasn't been converted yet. Things can still happen to that damage (prevented, ignored, transferred. etc.).
After the damage roll, the creature is dealt the nonlethal damage and then the creature handles how that damage should be treated.
So then the choice of the wielder is what determines PA not the outcome correct?
So if I attack with a merciful weapon I can attack with it lethally and the weapon not my actions make me deal non-lethal. So by this line of reasoning PA would work at the very least with a merciful weapon.
The rule doesn't say "convert". It says "treat".
You keep making super basic errors. It is these errors that lead you to wrong conclusions.
Also, I'm still waiting on a rules citation that says Power Attack doesn't apply to certain kinds of lethal damage.
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. This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (–50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon.When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the bonus to damage increases by +2.
You must choose to use this feat before making an attack roll, and its effects last until your next turn. The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.
Power Attack gives +2 damage to the damage roll [If it does hit point damage.]
In order for a creature to treat nonlethal damage as lethal damage, it must first have the excess nonlethal to treat it at lethal .
All of this is true.
When power attack conditions are checked, the damage from the roll is nonlethal and hasn't been converted yet. Things can still happen to that damage (prevented, ignored, transferred. etc.).
After the damage roll, the creature is dealt the nonlethal damage and then the creature handles how that damage should be treated.
None of this is in the rules. You are literally making all of this up.
|
|
It is my firm belief that Power Attack works with all weapons, no matter how they are used. The only exception would be such weapons that deal Str or other ability damage in place of Lethal/Non-Lethal.
The attacker is taking a to hit penalty to get the extra damage. Why do this if the ability may not work?
It is my firm belief that Power Attack works with all weapons, no matter how they are used. The only exception would be such weapons that deal Str or other ability damage in place of Lethal/Non-Lethal.
The attacker is taking a to hit penalty to get the extra damage. Why do this if the ability may not work?
It doesn't matter why you would do this, all that matters for our purposes is that the rules allow it, and so any rule interpretation must account for it. The interpretation must be consistent with other aspects of the rules we know to be true.
|
|
So we have one guy that puts a monkey wrench into the works, and suddenly everthing needs to be rethought? It works as it has before, Power Attack and Sap Master still are able to function with Non Lethal damage, as a lot of players have done before. Even GA admits that it is the Intent of Non Lethal damage, but he is insistent that intent has nothing to do with Rule As Written (R.A.W.).
I have said, in many other threads, some related to the double wielding of Earth Breakers, that the intent of the rule should be considered when interpreting R.A.W. rules and reading it for what it is. If we do this, then most of the misunderstandings about the ruleset can be avoided.
I agree with you thaX. Reasonableness and rationality should win out.
In this instance though, I actually think that RAW supports the concept that nonlethal damage is hit point damage. How the rules are organized, how nonlethal is tracked, how it interacts with lethal damage, how all weapons deal hit point damage, and a couple more, all support the idea that by RAW, nonlethal IS hit point damage. The best argument that GA can really muster is that nonlethal has it's own subheading, and all the rules for it are placed under that subheading instead of within the general rules for hit point damage. Nothing in the rules actually says that nonlethal damage isn't hit point damage.
Never mind that the alternative requires us to answer completely new questions that force us to create procedures that have never existed before now, and requires us to ignore or invent new rules to cover rule violations that the interpretation that nonlethal is not hit point damage creates.
So, Irontruth, your saying the attacker never chooses what type of damage he is doing, but it is determined in some other way? When one uses a Sap, would it suddenly turn into a sword at a given moment, just to do Lethal Damage?
Not sure that is how it goes...
Oh, forgot to answer this.
Not what I'm saying at all.
The rules that I see indicate that when you wield a weapon (let's say a sap), you choose which type of damage you WANT to deal: lethal or nonlethal. We then follow the rules for that type of damage.
For example, nonlethal damage has a very specific rule to follow. If the target has reached their capacity for nonlethal damage, all further damage is treated as lethal damage. The attack roll is done, and finished. We don't go back to the attack roll any more. The damage is still nonlethal, but once the threshold is reached, we treat it as if it were lethal.
What if you turned on Power Attack before your attack roll?
If nonlethal is hit points, you just add it into your damage normally. Any nonlethal beyond the threshold behaves just as above. The bonus damage from Power Attack is nonlethal, but once above the threshold, it operates just like lethal. Basically, everything works exactly how we understood it to work before we came to this thread.
If nonlethal is not hit points, that means we have to answer some awkward questions. Since Power Attack CAN be turned on even when you don't gain the bonus damage, that means it can be active on a nonlethal attack (just like it can be active on a touch attack, but not add in it's bonus). Once the damage goes into nonlethal overflow it is treated just like lethal damage. That means it is now eligible for Power Attack bonus damage. If we add it in, that means we are following the rules for how nonlethal damage changes properties once it reaches overflow, and we are following the rules for Power Attack. But it does create this strange order of operations that doesn't exist anywhere else in the game where the AMOUNT of damage changes part way through the application of damage. It technically follows all the rules, but it is strange.
Or, we can exclude Power Attack from the overflow damage, but this means we are breaking either the Power Attack rules, or the nonlethal overflow rules (or both possibly).
For some reason GA and Mallecks have abandoned the "strange, but legal accounting" method. Perhaps because it is strange, and therefore suggests that somewhere there should be at least one example of how this works in the past 10 years somewhere on the internet (Paizo employee, or just a fan even... seriously, not one fan has written how to do this accounting prior to like 2 weeks ago... seems suspicious). They have instead opted to ignore the Power Attack and nonlethal overflow rules, which means they are adopting a "not-RAW" argument to prove that their "RAW" reading of nonlethal is correct.
Sidenote: If GA or Mallecks quotes this post, and I'm only reading your post to the first dumb thing you say. If you make it a long post, be warned that I'm probably only reading/responding to the first sentence or two.
So then the choice of the wielder is what determines PA not the outcome correct?
So if I attack with a merciful weapon I can attack with it lethally and the weapon not my actions make me deal non-lethal. So by this line of reasoning PA would work at the very least with a merciful weapon.
The Attack chooses whether or not to use power attack before the attack roll. If the attack meets the conditions of Power Attack, they get +2 damage on the damage roll.
Merciful Weapons deal nonlethal damage when activated. Nonlethal damage are not hit point damage, therefore, the attacker does not get Power attack damage bonus.
When power attack conditions are checked, the damage from the roll is nonlethal and hasn't been converted yet. Things can still happen to that damage (prevented, ignored, transferred. etc.).After the damage roll, the creature is dealt the nonlethal damage and then the creature handles how that damage should be treated.
None of this is in the rules. You are literally making all of this up.
Which steps do I have incorrect?
1. Choose to use Power Attack
2. Make an attack roll
3. Make a damage roll.
3a. The bonus from Power Attack has conditions that need checked. If the attack was a touch attack or the effect of the attack is not doing hit point damage, then the bonus is not added.
3b. Calculate damage. This is the result of your damage roll.
4. Damage Roll is modified by spells/effects/abilities/etc.
5. The target takes the modified damage.
5a. If the target takes nonlethal damage in excess of their Max HP, it is treated as lethal damage.
Thax, I am unsure what points you are arguing. You mentioned Sap Master and some other things that I was not even aware were being argued. The two main arguments are...
Nonlethal Damage is hit point damage: Nonlethal damage is damage that is measured in hit points. Thus, it is hit point damage.
Nonlethal Damage is not hit point damage: Nonlethal damage is not defined as or referred to as hit point damage. It behaves differently. In at least one case, it is mentioned alongside the term "hit point damage" as a different thing.
Many of the posts have been complicated by others presenting each others arguments to each other and being responded to each other. Please share what issue you see with the above argument and I will try to explain.
Oh, forgot to answer this.
Not what I'm saying at all.
The rules that I see indicate that when you wield a weapon (let's say a sap), you choose which type of damage you WANT to deal: lethal or nonlethal. We then follow the rules for that type of damage.
I'm on board so far. You decide what type of damage you want to try to deal with your weapon. Lethal or Nonlethal.
For example, nonlethal damage has a very specific rule to follow. If the target has reached their capacity for nonlethal damage, all further damage is treated as lethal damage. The attack roll is done, and finished. We don't go back to the attack roll any more. The damage is still nonlethal, but once the threshold is reached, we treat it as if it were lethal.
The only way to know how much excess damage will be done is by the target receiving the nonlethal damage first. For example, Damage Reduction.
This is where I keep saying our disagreement is, and you tell me I have the rules wrong. However, as I have pointed out in two or three other posts that you have yet to respond to, your interpretation that the attacker gets to treat the damage as lethal at the time of the damage roll introduces many problems.
What if you turned on Power Attack before your attack roll?
If nonlethal is hit points, you just add it into your damage normally. Any nonlethal beyond the threshold behaves just as above. The bonus damage from Power Attack is nonlethal, but once above the threshold, it operates just like lethal. Basically, everything works exactly how we understood it to work before we came to this thread.
Generally, I agree with this under the assumption that nonlethal is hit point damage. However, treating the nonlethal damage to lethal damage at the attack roll introduces many problems.
If nonlethal is not hit points, that means we have to answer some awkward questions. Since Power Attack CAN be turned on even when you don't gain the bonus damage, that means it can be active on a nonlethal attack (just like it can be active on a touch attack, but not add in it's bonus). Once the damage goes into nonlethal overflow it is treated just like lethal damage. That means it is now eligible for Power Attack bonus damage. If we add it in, that means we are following the rules for how nonlethal damage changes properties once it reaches overflow, and we are following the rules for Power Attack. But it does create this strange order of operations that doesn't exist anywhere else in the game where the AMOUNT of damage changes part way through the application of damage. It technically follows all the rules, but it is strange.
Or, we can exclude Power Attack from the overflow damage, but this means we are breaking either the Power Attack rules, or the nonlethal overflow rules (or both possibly).
As I continue to point out, we disagree on exactly how excess nonlethal damage is handled. The process above does not reflect how I believe it works in any situation. [Whether nonlethal is not hit points or not.]
For some reason GA and Mallecks have abandoned the "strange, but legal accounting" method. Perhaps because it is strange, and therefore suggests that somewhere there should be at least one example of how this works in the past 10 years somewhere on the internet (Paizo employee, or just a fan even... seriously, not one fan has written how to do this accounting prior to like 2 weeks ago... seems suspicious). They have instead opted to ignore the Power Attack and nonlethal overflow rules, which means they are adopting a "not-RAW" argument to prove that their "RAW" reading of nonlethal is correct.
Sidenote: If GA or Mallecks quotes this post, and I'm only reading your post to the first dumb thing you say. If you make it a long post, be warned that I'm probably only reading/responding to the first sentence or two.
My position is logically consistent in all situations. Yours introduces problems that I have already pointed out in a few other posts that you refuse respond to.
Sidenote: Rude. Also, you have scared me by issuing a warning. Consider me kowtowed.
Which steps do I have incorrect?1. Choose to use Power Attack
2. Make an attack roll
3. Make a damage roll.
3a. The bonus from Power Attack has conditions that need checked. If the attack was a touch attack or the effect of the attack is not doing hit point damage, then the bonus is not added.
3b. Calculate damage. This is the result of your damage roll.
4. Damage Roll is modified by spells/effects/abilities/etc.
5. The target takes the modified damage.
5a. If the target takes nonlethal damage in excess of their Max HP, it is treated as lethal damage.
That process is all legal, as long as you treat nonlethal damage as hit point damage. If you don't, then it will result in ignoring specific rules, or the creation of new ones.
This is where I keep saying our disagreement is, and you tell me I have the rules wrong. However, as I have pointed out in two or three other posts that you have yet to respond to, your interpretation that the attacker gets to treat the damage as lethal at the time of the damage roll introduces many problems.
No, you aren't understanding my interpretation.
My interpretation is that nonlethal damage is hit point damage.
That process is all legal, as long as you treat nonlethal damage as hit point damage. If you don't, then it will result in ignoring specific rules, or the creation of new ones.
Which steps do I have incorrect?1. Choose to use Power Attack
2. Make an attack roll
3. Make a damage roll.
3a. The bonus from Power Attack has conditions that need checked. If the attack was a touch attack or the effect of the attack is not doing hit point damage, then the bonus is not added.
3b. Calculate damage. This is the result of your damage roll.
4. Damage Roll is modified by spells/effects/abilities/etc.
5. The target takes the modified damage.
5a. If the target takes nonlethal damage in excess of their Max HP, it is treated as lethal damage.
Ok Great. Let's go.
1. Choose to use Power Attak
2. Make an attack roll to deal nonlethal damage
3. Make a damage roll.
3a. The bonus from Power Attack has conditions that need checked. All of the damage is nonlethal damage. You say nonlethal is hit point damage. I say it isn't, so we disagree on whether or not Power Attack should apply.
3b. Calculate damage. This the result of the damage roll. Still nonlethal.
4. Damage Roll is modified by spells/effects/abilities/etc.
5. Target takes the modified damage.
5a. Any excess nonlethal is treated as lethal damage.