|
Edit: maouse33, if a something refers to "hit point damage" is it referring to lethal damage or nonlethal damage?
Depends on the weapon. All weapons deal hit point damage. Some deal lethal, some deal nonlethal. Not a hard concept. You can apply PA to any weapon damage (since it is all hit point damage) but not to say "some spells" which do other types of damage. As already explained (over and over).
Even Featherweight Darts specify "instead of doing damage" and don't use "hit point damage" you want them to. Because, as pointed out, page 140 clearly states it would be hit point damage, because it is a weapon. Note: You can't use Power Attack on featherweight darts, because they SPECIFICALLY SAY they don't do damage. Unlike nonlethal weapons which DON'T SPECIFICALLY SAY they don't do damage (as a weapon, which is hit point damage, modified by nonlethal descriptor, see page 191). (You'd be using them as an improvised melee weapon if you did try and use PA, anyway, so you might have a case that they would do 1d2 lethal damage in that instance and be able to use PA for an improvised melee hit with them, if the GM ruled they did damage as such a weapon as opposed to being consumed on use instead) As of yet, I have not found a melee weapon which does not do damage. And page 140 says it is all hit point damage. I really need not care about nonlethal when I declare the PA. I know it is going to do hit point damage because it is a weapon.
You're ignoring the fact that Power Attack applies to hit point damage.
Okay, lets try this. Why do you think nonlethal damage doesn't qualify for Power Attack? I know we've gone through this many times, but just tell me which rules led you to believe this, you don't need to quote.
Do not deduct the nonlethal damage number from your current hit points.
Nonlethal does not damage hit points, therefore not Hit point damage.
|
|
You're ignoring the fact that Power Attack applies to hit point damage.
Okay, lets try this. Why do you think nonlethal damage doesn't qualify for Power Attack? I know we've gone through this many times, but just tell me which rules led you to believe this, you don't need to quote.
Nonlethal does not damage hit points, therefore not Hit point damage.
Do not deduct the nonlethal damage number from your current hit points.
WRONG. Nonlethal weapons are still weapons and weapon damage is hit point damage. There are two types of hit point damage, lethal and nonlethal. Tracked separately. This is where you are misunderstanding it all. Because nonlethal doesn't have the words you want it to have. It is still hit point damage. Sorry, nowhere does anything state it is NOT. So we have to follow the general rule on page 140. Unless you come up with some other rule somewhere from some source that states that nonlethal weapons don't do hit point damage you are simply wrong. ALL weapons do hit point damage. There are two types of hit point damage, lethal and nonlethal. Need I say it again and again until it sinks in? Your premise is that "because it doesn't say it is, it isn't" is wrong: on page 140 it clearly states it is hit point damage. It is wrong on page 189 when it says the "most common way" where you jump ship and presume, for some unknown reason, that this is the only way to be hurt or take hit point damage (it's not). It is wrong on page 191 when nonlethal is compared against hit points in a slightly different way (hint: it is still hit point damage, page 140, it is applied differently 191). Again, page 189 doesn't describe the only way to get hurt by hit point damage, it describes the most common way. This is what we call a context clue.
maouse33, if an effect does "hit point damage" to a target, what type of damage do they take?
You're ignoring the fact that Power Attack applies to hit point damage.
Okay, lets try this. Why do you think nonlethal damage doesn't qualify for Power Attack? I know we've gone through this many times, but just tell me which rules led you to believe this, you don't need to quote.
Nonlethal does not damage hit points, therefore not Hit point damage.
Do not deduct the nonlethal damage number from your current hit points.
If I accept that as true, then once there is nonlethal overflow, it is hit point damage.
Power Attack applies to hit point damage.
What rule tells you that it doesn't apply to this hit point damage?
You're ignoring the fact that Power Attack applies to hit point damage.
Okay, lets try this. Why do you think nonlethal damage doesn't qualify for Power Attack? I know we've gone through this many times, but just tell me which rules led you to believe this, you don't need to quote.
Nonlethal does not damage hit points, therefore not Hit point damage.
Do not deduct the nonlethal damage number from your current hit points.If I accept that as true, then once there is nonlethal overflow, it is hit point damage.
Power Attack applies to hit point damage.
What rule tells you that it doesn't apply to this hit point damage?
Not applicable. Power Attack modifies the effect of the attack roll, which is complete before the target takes damage.
|
|
Nonlethal does not damage hit points, therefore not Hit point damage.
This is wrong. Nonlethal weapons do hit point damage p 140. They apply it as per p 191. It doesn't magically become "not what it is" because it doesn't damage hit points directly lowering your total. The conclusion presumes the "only way to take hit point damage is directly to hit points" but this is wrong. You also take it to DR. You also take it to resistances. You also compare it to immunities. You also compare it against a nonlethal pool equal to your HP. All of these can cause it to "not apply any hit point damage directly reducing hit points." Under your backward thinking, if someone doesn't overcome resistance, DR or immunity, they aren't doing HP damage, and thus couldn't have used PA to begin with. Which is just wrong. As pointed out sooooo many times already.
Power Attack modifies both the attack AND the damage roll. I'm assuming we're talking about a hit, since a miss would be irrelevant.
Attack rolls aren't damage rolls.
Why does it not apply to the damage roll, when the damage roll does hit point damage?
maouse33, if an effect does "hit point damage" to a target, what type of damage do they take?What has this got to do with the general rule that all weapon damage is hit point damage? Do weapons do hit point damage? Yes or no? Page 140 pretty well spells it out for you if you need to check again.
It doesn't specifically have to do with weapons. If an effect were target takes "1d6 hit point damage," what damage does the target take? Lethal, nonlethal, both, or a as-of-yet-to-be-mentioned kind?
You're claiming you can't accept the penalty if the bonus doesn't apply?
???
When you use Power Attack, it modifies your attack rolls and it modifies your damage rolls (if conditions are met.)
Before the target can take any damage, the damage roll is complete.
I can't deal "1d6 +2 damage" to something.. I have to roll the die and calculate damage. This is when Power attack happens, conditions are checked and if they are met, the damage roll is modified.
After that happens, then the target takes damage and any excess nonlethal is treated as lethal. Power attack doesn't happen here.
Where in the rules does it say the damage roll is complete?
|
|
It doesn't specifically have to do with weapons. If an effect were target takes "1d6 hit point damage," what damage does the target take? Lethal, nonlethal, both, or a as-of-yet-to-be-mentioned kind?maouse33, if an effect does "hit point damage" to a target, what type of damage do they take?What has this got to do with the general rule that all weapon damage is hit point damage? Do weapons do hit point damage? Yes or no? Page 140 pretty well spells it out for you if you need to check again.
It states in the description if it is nonlethal. The general rule is that it will be lethal unless otherwise stated. For instance, Frostbite states nonlethal cold damage. Ergo, it still does cold damage. nonlethal is a subtype. You don't ignore the cold immunity someone has because it is still cold damage, even if nonlethal. Moving on to a spell effect which does damage and is a touch spell: Shocking Grasp, it does dice damage, and is a melee touch attack. It does lethal electric, because it does not say it is nonlethal. So there you have it, an instance where they take nonlethal hit point damage and one where they take lethal hit point damage. Both with starting descriptors other than "weapon." Both do hit point damage. One applies to the nonlethal pool. One to Hit Points normally. Both damage the person. Both would get the benefit of being a +2 melee damage calculation under PA, because they both do hit point damage from melee (touch) attacks, in RAW theory anyway.
Now, are you purposefully ignoring page 140 just so you can ask me arbitrary questions that you think will somehow change the RAW? The lethal, nonlethal descriptors are simply how you handle hit point damage. One goes against actual hit points, and the other against the not real nonlethal hit point pool. One is the most common way, one is a less common way. But they are both hit point damage.
Again, the PA effect not dealing hit points is referring to spells like Drench, Shock, etc... that don't deal damage. It can apply to any spell that deals damage in hit points, to either real hit points or nonlethal hit points.
Where in the rules does it say the damage roll is complete?
Whenever a roll is required, the roll is noted as "d#," with the "#" representing the number of sides on the die. If you need to roll multiple dice of the same type, there will be a number before the "d." For example, if you are required to roll 4d6, you should roll four six-sided dice and add the results together. Sometimes there will be a + or – after the notation, meaning that you add that number to, or subtract it from, the total results of the dice (not to each individual die rolled). Most die rolls in the game use a d20 with a number of modifiers based on the character's skills, his or her abilities, and the situation. Generally speaking, rolling high is better than rolling low. Percentile rolls are a special case, indicated as rolling d%. You can generate a random number in this range by rolling two differently colored ten-sided dice (2d10). Pick one color to represent the tens digit, then roll both dice. If the die chosen to be the tens digit rolls a "4" and the other d10 rolls a "2," then you've generated a 42. A zero on the tens digit die indicates a result from 1 to 9, or 100 if both dice result in a zero. Some d10s are printed with "10," "20," "30," and so on in order to make reading d% rolls easier. Unless otherwise noted, whenever you must round a number, always round down.
Whenever a roll is required, you roll the dice and add or subtract the modifier. No other steps are noted.
I know I'm going to regret getting involved in this.
In my humble opinion, "hit points" is a unit of measure. A longsword deals 1d8 of that unit of measure, with a caveat that an additional "type" (slashing) is applied to that damage for purposes of damage reduction. A fireball spell deals 1d6 per caster level of that unit of measure, with a caveat that an additional "type" (fire) is applied to that damage for purposes of energy resistance. A sap deals 1d4 of that unit of measure, with a caveat that an additional "type" (non-lethal) is applied to that damage for purposes of tracking on a separate line to allow capturing a foe.
This differs from other damage, such as ability score damage, which are measured in other units; "ability points".
If the unit of measure is "hit points" - which non-lethal damage is - then it's hit point damage.
A merciful fireball deals hit point damage which is of type fire, and non-lethal.
Answer the question "how many hit points of damage does a sap inflict?" It deals 1d4 hit points of damage, and those hit points are non-lethal.
Said one last way, non-lethal damage is not measured in bananas, elephants, or light-years. It is measured in hit points, thus it is hit point damage.
It states in the description if it is nonlethal. The general rule is that it will be lethal unless otherwise stated. For instance, Frostbite states nonlethal cold damage. Ergo, it still does cold damage. nonlethal is a subtype. You don't ignore the cold immunity someone has because it is still cold damage, even if nonlethal. Moving on to a spell effect which does damage and is a touch spell: Shocking Grasp, it does dice damage, and is a melee touch attack. It does lethal electric, because it does not say it is nonlethal. So there you have it, an instance where they take nonlethal hit point damage and one where they take lethal hit point damage. Both with starting descriptors other than "weapon." Both do hit point damage. One applies to the nonlethal pool. One to Hit Points normally. Both damage the person. Both would get the benefit of being a melee damage calculation under PA, because they both do hit point damage.
Now, are you purposefully ignoring page 140 just so you can ask me arbitrary questions that you think will somehow change the RAW? The lethal, nonlethal descriptors are simply how you handle hit point damage. One goes against actual hit points, and the other against the not real nonlethal hit point pool. But they are both hit point damage.
Again, the PA effect not dealing hit points is referring to spells like Drench, Shock, etc... that don't deal damage. It can apply to any spell that deals damage in hit points, to...
When something says it "does damage" the default assumption is that it is referring to lethal damage. Statements exist like this..
Damage reduces a target’s current hit points.
Nonlethal damage has specific rules on how it is tracked.
You are claiming that hit point damage is a category that only refers to lethal and nonlethal damage. Why is there any expectation that when using the term "hit point damage" it is referring to one or the other? Not all hit point damage damages hit points.
"All weapons do hit point damage." <-- you claim refers to both.
Effect deals 1d4 hit point damage <--- is there any precedence that this should be assumed to be one or the other?
I know I'm going to regret getting involved in this.
In my humble opinion, "hit points" is a unit of measure. A longsword deals 1d8 of that unit of measure, with a caveat that an additional "type" (slashing) is applied to that damage for purposes of damage reduction. A fireball spell deals 1d6 per caster level of that unit of measure, with a caveat that an additional "type" (fire) is applied to that damage for purposes of energy resistance. A sap deals 1d4 of that unit of measure, with a caveat that an additional "type" (non-lethal) is applied to that damage for purposes of tracking on a separate line to allow capturing a foe.
This differs from other damage, such as ability score damage, which are measured in other units; "ability points".
If the unit of measure is "hit points" - which non-lethal damage is - then it's hit point damage.
A merciful fireball deals hit point damage which is of type fire, and non-lethal.
Answer the question "how many hit points of damage does a sap inflict?" It deals 1d4 hit points of damage, and those hit points are non-lethal.
Said one last way, non-lethal damage is not measured in bananas, elephants, or light-years. It is measured in hit points, thus it is hit point damage.
Yes, this was how I originally entered into the discussion myself. However, I have since been convinced that nonlethal damage is damage that is measured in hit points.
The two basic stances are:
A: Nonlethal damage is damage measured in hit points, therefore, it is hit point damage.
B: Hit point damage is damage which reduces hit points. Nonlethal damage does not do this, therefore, it is not hit point damage.
Where in the rules does it say the damage roll is complete?Whenever a roll is required, the roll is noted as "d#," with the "#" representing the number of sides on the die. If you need to roll multiple dice of the same type, there will be a number before the "d." For example, if you are required to roll 4d6, you should roll four six-sided dice and add the results together. Sometimes there will be a + or – after the notation, meaning that you add that number to, or subtract it from, the total results of the dice (not to each individual die rolled). Most die rolls in the game use a d20 with a number of modifiers based on the character's skills, his or her abilities, and the situation. Generally speaking, rolling high is better than rolling low. Percentile rolls are a special case, indicated as rolling d%. You can generate a random number in this range by rolling two differently colored ten-sided dice (2d10). Pick one color to represent the tens digit, then roll both dice. If the die chosen to be the tens digit rolls a "4" and the other d10 rolls a "2," then you've generated a 42. A zero on the tens digit die indicates a result from 1 to 9, or 100 if both dice result in a zero. Some d10s are printed with "10," "20," "30," and so on in order to make reading d% rolls easier. Unless otherwise noted, whenever you must round a number, always round down.Whenever a roll is required, you roll the dice and add or subtract the modifier. No other steps are noted.
And Power Attack is one of those modifiers. I don't see anything in there that says you can't add in Power Attack once the damage meets the feat's requirements, or that there is a specific cutoff point where you stop checking for modifiers. Power Attack tells us the requirements for adding in the bonus, unless something specifically tells us not to do that, we have to follow that rule. It is a rule.
Where in the rules does it say the damage roll is complete? Where is there a rule that says we don't add in Power Attack to lethal damage?
Are you suggesting that every damage roll that has ever been rolled is still happening right now?
No, you are suggesting it. Unless you can provide a rule that tells us otherwise, Power Attack tells us it gets added in once the damage causes hit point loss.
You can solve this by just saying that nonlethal is hit point damage, because then Power Attack gets added in right away and there is never a situation where we check it later.
I'm sorry you don't like the consequence of your ruling. You don't get to invent rules to make it convenient for you though.
Nothing about The assumption "nonlethal damage is not Hit point damage" has anything to do with what a roll is or when it ends.
Why are you suggesting it does?
|
The adjustment to the damage roll is done as soon as the character takes a penalty to attacking the target. The only reason he would not be able to do this is when he is not doing damage, such as doing a CMB to trip, then Power Attack can not be used, or when using touch attacks, as these do not benefit from a strength bonus to damage that Power Attack works from.
A character can use power attack with both types of Damage, lethal and Non Lethal. There is nothing in the quoted rules or has been said on this thread that disputes this.
Nothing about The assumption "nonlethal damage is not Hit point damage" has anything to do with what a roll is or when it ends.
Why are you suggesting it does?
I'm not suggesting anything.
I am telling you, based on how the rules are written, that if you don't add in Power Attack to nonlethal damage, you do have to add it in on nonlethal overflow because nonlethal overflow DOES meet your requirement of hit point damage.
Unless you can cite a rule that specifically says you don't add in Power Attack for some reason.
You aren't arguing with me, you are arguing with the rule book. You are disagreeing with the text of Power Attack. The ONLY way you can win that argument, is if you can cite another part of the book that specifically says why Power Attack doesn't apply. I am not sharing my opinion, I am only telling you what the book says.
This is why I find this conversation frustrating. You are claiming a RAW argument, but you aren't using anything RAW to support your argument. You're inventing ideas and concepts, which on the face sound reasonable, but aren't actually in the rules.
Oh OK. I see the issue now. You are just claiming that my position is that I believe things that I don't believe, and then arguing against those things.
I am now convinced that moving forward in the discussion is not worth pursuing.
If that got you to stop, I'm fine with it.
I know you don't believe the Power Attack thing is an issue, but it is. The rules text says it is a problem, and you have not been able to cite a rule that says otherwise.
Cite a rule that specifically deals with this issue and tells us HOW Power Attack is not added in. A rule that is unambiguous in telling us this is true. I will declare that there is no issue with your opinion, and we can agree to disagree.
Find an "arrow of time" rule. Find a "modifiers can't change" rule. If it isn't a rule, you're just making it up in order to fix a problem your ruling creates.
1 is false. Power Attack specifically says it applies to hit point damage. If the target takes hit point damage, then Power Attack applies to that damage. The only way we know to consider nonlethal not hit point damage is because it doesn't pass the test of reducing hit points... but overflow passes that test, because it does reduce hit points.
2, treated as is not the same as converted. The damage is still the same damage, but it has properties change. Even if it does convert, that damage is still eligible for Power Attack because Power Attack applies to all hit point damage. Hit point damage is determined by the target losing current hit points, which the damage now does, which meets the requirements for Power Attack.
3. Power Attack just says "hit point damage". That's it. If you can show me that nonlethal overflow isn't hit point damage, then maybe that would apply. But again, Power Attack just asks if hit point damage is being dealt. If the target is taking hit point damage, how is the attacker not dealing it? Did it come from somewhere else? There's nothing in the rules that makes this distinction, or if it does, it is a very specific rule (like a specific spell).
RAI - you're saying that it doesn't make sense that I can't swing a sap harder to try and get you knocked out faster... ? If that passes a smell test, it's the same smell test that lets me know my dog pooped in the house.
We've done to this to death. If all you have is the same dog poop that's been shared so far, don't bother. If you have a RULE you'd like to cite, please do. Otherwise...well, you know how I feel about it.
I do have a rule. Power Attack says it applies to hit point damage. Lethal damage is hit point damage. Nonlethal overflow is lethal damage. Therefore, Power Attack applies to nonlethal overflow.
Applying Power Attack to the nonlethal overflow is fully legal according to those 3 rules.
Or are you saying, because I'm not quoting IN THIS POST, that they don't count? Because they've been quoted to death in this thread. I'll do it again if you ask nicely. But if you don't ask nice, you can go find them in a previous post.
Or are you saying I don't have a specific rule countering your three points? I don't need a specific rule, seeing as you didn't provide one for them, other than to point out that the Power Attack to nonlethal overflow is already an established fact. If you want to claim it isn't an established fact I'd like to hear your argument, but you're going to need to cite a rule, because those are 3 rules in the text, so if you want to say they don't work that way, you'll need something from the text to back you up.
There is no "agree to disagree" here. Either you are following the text, or you aren't. The text says that nonlethal overflow applies to Power Attack. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary.
Three quotes from the PFSRD:
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.
When a creature is out of capacity for nonlethal damage, all further nonlethal is treated as lethal damage. So, then we go to look at what lethal damage is.
The most common way that your character gets hurt is to take lethal damage and lose hit points.
Lethal damage is hit point damage. I wonder how hit point damage interacts with Power Attack, lets quote that feat quick.
Benefit: 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 applies to all melee attacks (that are not touch attacks) as long as the attack includes one effect that does hit point damage.
Since nonlethal overflow is lethal damage, and lethal damage is hit point damage, nonlethal overflow qualifies for the inclusion of the Power Attack bonus.
I've now cited the book 3 times, compared to your 0. But you can stick with your "I know you are, but what am I" strategy if you like, but it reveals that you are expressing just opinion and not citing any rules. None of this is my opinion, I'm just quoting the rules.
Mallecks & Butt_Luckily, we're all aware that the rules don't specifically state "nonlethal damage is a form of hit point damage". Is there any confliction with the rules that either of you can think of that would happen if nonlethal were to count as hit point damage?
(Other than nonlethal not being subtracted from your hit point total).
Doubtful however there are gonna be a lot of things that would suddenly make Nonlethal a lot more attractive. I mean just imagine not trigger certain abilities like shield other or regeneration since you can just bypass the trigger of "hit point damage"
EDIT: After a bit of reading can anyone one on the Nonlethal is not HP damage side explain to me what the difference in Hit point damage and normal hit point damage.
I ask about the normal part because i have now found 2 examples in favor of nonlethal being hit point damage.
So here we see usage of the term Lethal Hit point damage, doesn't that mean there has to be another type. And the same with below and Normal hit point damage.
Butt,
Dude, I've been arguing that nonlethal is hit point damage THE WHOLE TIME.
None of your "3 explanations" is rules text. Do you have rules text that says one of those things? The rules I quote tell us that Power Attack must apply to overflow (though I think nonlethal is hit point damage, so it actually applies to all of it). When I point out the Power Attack and overflow problem, I am not talking about something I think actually exists, it is a rules inconsistency involving trying to treat nonlethal as not hit point damage.
Per RAW, Power Attack says it applies to all hit point damage. Lethal damage is hit point damage. Nonlethal overflow is lethal damage. Therefore, Power Attack MUST apply to nonlethal overflow.... unless... you have a rule that says otherwise. Do you have a rules citation that says otherwise? Or can you show how any one of those three rules is incorrect? Tell me which of the three rules you find vague and we can talk about it.
RAI:
"Exceptionally Deadly" someone trying to hit you harder with their fists, but they aren't highly trained with their fists (no Improved Unarmed) can still swing their fists as hard as they can to hit you.
Healing applies to both tracks. The current amount of damage in either track is irrelevant, you heal up to full on one and/or the other. The ratio is always 1:1. How ever much lethal damage COULD be healed (regardless of how much damage is available to be healed) is how much nonlethal CAN be healed.
Currently down 3 hps, and 5 points of nonlethal
Healed for 4 points, means up to full on regular hit points and 1 point remains on nonlethal damage.
Power Attack applies to effects from attack rolls that deal damage, not across the board for lethal damage. If you have some rule that says we should check the specific rule for overflow during the calculation of the damage roll, when no defender's hp is around to check against, provide it.
Power Attack provides two exclusions:
1: touch attacks2: effects that aren't hit point damage
Go read the feat. Let me know which part is confusing you. Let's focus on Power Attack specifically, then we'll move onto lethal damage.
RAI: A 20th level Fighter who doesn't have Improve Unarmed isn't very well "trained" in their fists, they're trained in fighting, but every unarmed attack draws an attack of opportunity. Are you arguing that they can't kill a peasant less than 10 seconds with their bare hands? Even though they have zero feats/class abilities that aid their unarmed attack.
Let's say 20th level, with a 20 Strength.
That's 1d3+5 base damage. Add in Power Attack, that's 1d3+19.
Against a peasant with a 10 con, assuming max hit points, there's only a 33% chance they die on the first hit. It's a guaranteed death on the second hit.
That seems pretty deadly to me. Without Power Attack it still only takes 1 round of full attacking. Rolling minimum damage it would take 4 hits.
Let's say that a 20th level fighter is a bit lopsided.
Well, if the fighter is 1st level, it just takes 4-6 rounds now (with chance to miss). That's less than 30 seconds.
Being punched to death in less than 30 seconds sounds pretty deadly to me.
...but your example for lethal hit point damage is all I needed to see. I found a couple more instances of that terminology, and I find it perfectly convincing on its own that nonlethal damage is hit point damage. Thanks for the find!
I want to make sure I'm reading this right... You now believe that nonlethal counts as hit point damage, right?
How do you perform an "exceptionally deadly" attack with nonlethal damage?
Totally agree with you. The flavour text of power attack is what made me originally think you shouldn't be able to but the rules over flavour convinced me. Nonlethal is tricky to picture due to a few different things. For example, attacking with the flat of your sword is a good description for doing nonlethal with your sword because you're not cutting the enemy.... but then how do you do nonlethal with a club? My best idea is that you're hitting for the stomach rather than the ribs.
A better wording than "exceptionally deadly" would be something akin to "exceptionally powerful".Is it expected that heal spells are twice as effective on a target that only has nonlethal damage? (I think I actually find my answer here to be "yes")
Rules as written, yeah, I believe you're supposed to heal damage (lethal or nonlethal) and then remove the same amount of nonlethal. Which is why it's worded that way ("...When a spell or ability cures hit point damage, it also removes an equal amount of nonlethal damage....") (And why it has caused an argument to start with.)
|
|
"How do you perform an "exceptionally deadly" attack with nonlethal damage?"
Horrible question. You hit them as hard as you would normally (POWER ATTACK) but turn your sword sideways (like in the old "D&D" rules for doing non-lethal). You take your -4 to hit, but do the same amount of damage. Are you proposing that a fighter doesn't know how to fight? He can't choose to knock you out instead of cut you in half?
All weapon damage is hit point damage. Page 140. Doesn't matter if they have been used to deal nonlethal damage, as nothing in the nonlethal section says "nonlethal damage is NOT hit point damage." Ergo, it remains hit point damage, delivered from the weapon, which does hit point damage. Pretty simple and straight forward. Handle a weapon's nonlethal hit point damage as it says to on page 191.
Using a sword to deal nonlethal does the same amount of damage as using it to do lethal.
If the target is already at their limit for nonlethal, the sword causes the same amount of hit point loss whether you attack with it lethally or nonlethally.
What in the rules suggests Power Attack damage should be different from the sword's damage? What in the rules suggests that swapping from lethal to nonlethal reduces how much damage is dealt?
The system doesn't model injuries and wounds very well in the core game. This is a fundamental problem with HIT POINTS and not lethal/nonlethal damage. Regardless of how it happens, a Fighter with 15 sword wounds who still has 1 hp left can operate just as effectively as someone who is uninjured. I don't know about you, but I doubt I'd be able to walk with just a couple sword wounds.
Wow, Talonhawke. Good job! How did it take this long for these to come up? I would say that they are pretty convincing. Moving me from being sure that nonlethal is not hit point damage to being closer to "on the fence."
Here is one I found as well:
This spell functions as intellect fortress I, but in addition, any mind-affecting effects that deal damage have their damage reduced by half (before any reduction due to a successful save or other effect). This applies to both hit point damage and ability score damage. This spell can be undercast.
This heavily implies that there are two main types of damage as well. Nothing explicit and I consider this type of "evidence" to not be that strong. It can still be argued that other types of damage exist.
However, I also found some stuff like this...
The slaver panthereon was initially designed to supervise recalcitrant slaves, but it has since proved equally useful when hunting anyone the golem’s creator wants to have captured alive. Because slaves and prisoners are often a very valuable commodity, the slaver panthereon has the ability to, as a swift action, convert all of its attacks to nonlethal damage. When it does so, its slam attacks also gain the grab special ability. As another swift action, it can change its attacks back to dealing normal lethal damage (losing the grab ability in the process). Since they are nonintelligent, slaver panthereons default to dealing nonlethal damage unless their master orders otherwise.
Does this imply that there is some other type of lethal damage?
Here are some things for consideration for nonlethal damage = hit point damage.
1. Nonlethal double dips all healing effects.
A few (hundred?) posts ago, I argued that nonlethal cannot be "healed." I have found this to be incorrect. (Sorry, Warped Savant!) In addition to the nonlethal healing naturally quote that Warped Savant and I discussed, I have found several spells/abilities that specifically state they heal nonlethal damage.
You can touch a creature as a standard action to heal it of 1d6 points of nonlethal damage + 1 point per cleric level.This touch also removes the fatigued, shaken, and sickened conditions (but has no effect on more severe conditions). You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.
Would the above ability qualify as "curing hit point 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 nonlethal damage is hit point damage, then the amount of "healing taken" from Calming Touch will be 1d6 + 1/lvl (x2), necessarily.
I didn't have a problem with the traditional healing spells curing 2x nonlethal, because that was happening anyway. However, nonlethal-only healing spells are now all twice as strong? Thoughts?
2. Healing of nonlethal damage stops bleeds.
You lacerate the body of the target creature with telekinetic force, rending it limb from limb. The target creature takes 1d6 points of damage per caster level you have (maximum 10d6 points of damage). If this spell deals an amount of damage to the target equal to more than half its maximum hit point total, one of the target’s limbs (determined randomly) is gruesomely ripped from the target’s body and flies 15 feet away from the creature in a random direction. The target then takes 1 point of bleed damage per 2 caster levels you have. The bleeding can be stopped by a successful DC 15 Heal check or the application of any effect that heals hit point damage, but the limb can be restored only by powerful healing effects such as heal or regeneration. If the damage reduces the target’s hit points to below 0, all of its limbs are affected in this fashion.
Rend Body can literally rip your off your arm. Does natural healing of nonlethal damage stop the bleed? If I took 1 nonlethal damage (skinned my knee) 559 rounds ago, and then had Rend Body and my arm was literally ripped off... does my 1 nonlethal naturally healing stop the bleed? Maybe it doesn't count as an effect. I want to say that a spell or ability that heals nonlethal damage shouldn't stop bleed damage, but there isn't anything wrong with it logically, I suppose. Thoughts?
3. There is no precedent (that I found) for a presumption that "hit point damage" means lethal damage by default. "Damage" is defined in at least 1 spot as "reducing hit points" so that sets up the default assumption for "damage."
If something heals "hit point damage" is it healing lethal damage or nonlethal damage? Do you get to choose? Does the caster? Why would it heal one over the other?
If something deals "hit point damage" is it dealing lethal damage or nonlethal damage? "All weapons deal hit point damage," is great for weapons, but what about poisons, spells, abilities, etc.? Maybe I missed something that set up an assumption somewhere.
4. Merciful Power
To use this feat, you must maintain your psionic focus, rather than expend it. You can alter powers that inflict hit point damage to inflict nonlethal damage instead. Powers that inflict hit point damage of a particular type (such as fire) inflict nonlethal damage of that same type. Using this feat does not increase the power point cost of the power.
To counter the the text of Intellect Fortress II, I present Merciful Power. (Actually, I found Merciful Power first and was pretty happy with myself before stumbling upon Intellect Fortress II by accident.)
The text of this spell heavily implies that hit point damage and nonlethal damage are two different things completely, not that one is a subtype of the other. However, just like with some other examples like this, I consider these to be of the "weakest" of evidence.
5. Ring of Resumption
This adamantine ring contains a moving, notched golden circle that whirs with healing energy when activated. Once per day when the wearer takes hit point damage by any means, she can activate the ring as an immediate action. This immediately allows a living wearer to regain 5 hit points per round and recover from an equal amount of nonlethal damage. The wearer regenerates a total number of hit points equal only to the damage taken when the ring was activated, and only a single attack (or another single instance) can activate the ring. If the wearer sustains damage from multiple sources simultaneously, she must pick which source activates the ring. When either all of this damage is healed or the wearer’s hit points reach her hit point maximum (whichever comes first), the hit point regeneration ceases.
In addition, the wearer is immune to bleed damage while the ring’s regeneration is active. If the wearer lost a limb, an organ, or any other body part as a result of the effect she used to activate the ring, the ring regenerates it as per regenerate. As with the spell, if the severed members are not present and touching the creature, this regenerate effect takes 2d10 rounds (this may cause the regenerate effect affecting a lost limb or organ to last longer than the hit point regeneration).
This ring heals 5 hit point and 5 nonlethal each round. Which actually translates to 5 hit points and 15 nonlethal each round (but that extra 10 doesn't count towards the rest of its effects, as we know now "deals" and "taken" are separate. But we'll just ignore that because it was covered above.)
If a creature with lethal and nonlethal uses this ability.. the 5 nonlethal counts against the max healing of the effect, right? Because if the effect is only going to heal 10 hit points, then on the first use, it will heal 5 lethal and 5 nonlethal and then the effect will expire. Thoughts?
6. There are some effects that happen when blood is involved. When someone bleeds on something or a transmutation effect on blood, do these trigger off any nonlethal damage? Do/should all nonlethal damage cause the victim to "bleed"? I know this is more RAI.. but just bringing it up
This leather cloak looks tattered and stained no matter how carefully it is cleaned and repaired. Once per day, when a ratfolk wearer bleeds upon the cloak (generally when he takes hit point damage), the cloak mentally alerts the wearer’s nearest ratfolk ally within 10 miles, telling her the approximate distance and direction to the wearer. It also alerts the wearer to the approximate distance and direction of that ally.
Your blood thickens to becomes a glue-like substance upon contact with air. A piercing or slashing weapon that deals hit point damage to you is stuck fast unless the wielder succeeds at a Reflex save. A creature can pry off a stuck weapon on its turn as a standard action with a successful Strength check against the spell’s DC. Strong alcohol or universal solvent dissolves the adhesive. The glue breaks down 5 rounds after you die, or when the duration ends. This glue has no effect while underwater or in environments that lack air.
If I slap the rat in the face, his Blood Alarm happens?
If I poke someone with Adhesive Blood active really hard (nonlethal unarmed strike as piercing), and I fail the reflex save, is my finger stuck to his blood?Bleed Damage in the game is supposed to always be lethal damage. Is there a way that "bleeding" (not the game term, just in general) can be seen as anything other than lethal? If it doesn't clot, you will eventually die.
The rules clearly state a 1:1 ratio, where are you getting a 2:1 ratio?
P1. Assume Nonlethal damage is hit point damage.
P2. When a spell or ability heals hit point damage, remove an equal amount of nonlethal damage.
C: When a spell or ability heals nonlethal damage, remove an equal amount of nonlethal damage.
|
|
It isn't "Real" hp, but a tally that goes against Lethal, giving less HP for the character to have before passing out. This would not have Non Lethal double dip on healing, with or without Lethal damage on that character.
If the Healing would heal Lethal damage, whether or not there is Lethal damage to heal, it heals the same amount of Non Lethal damage.
OK guys seriously, is it Hit point damage or not??
You can't say it is hit point damage for some things and not others.
It isn't Normal HP damage which is what one would assume on default when something says it deals/heals Hit point damage. This doesn't preclude things like power since it is dealing hit point damage but when it's not specified we would default to normal.
P1. Assume Nonlethal damage is hit point damage.
P2. When a spell or ability heals hit point damage, remove an equal amount of nonlethal damage.C: When a spell or ability heals nonlethal damage, remove an equal amount of nonlethal damage.
I see this text:
When a spell or ability cures hit point damage, it also removes an equal amount of nonlethal damage.
It says "equal amount".
Are you claiming that 5=10? That 5 hp is equal to 10 hp?
Or is there text that talks about "healing overflow" somewhere? Because there is specific language about overflow damage, but I currently don't see any text about healing overflow (other than you can't go above your hit point maximum).