Share Pain clarification

[ograx]

If I have level 1 mystic who took 10 damage who uses share pain as a reaction and the creature fails will save how much damage does the creature take back as damage from share pain? The wording makes it ifffy in my eyes how rhte damage works. It’s either 1 or 9 which is a huge difference!

[Psyren]

I see the confusion; "equal amount of damage" could mean the total incoming after the reduction (the 9) or the reduction amount itself (the 1).

FAQing as I'm not sure either.

[ograx]

Yeah I searched forums and all I found was the same question without any answer. Sorry about my spelling in my first post as well! Typing on iPhone before bed quickly just after the game where this question came up.

[Pantshandshake]

In this case, the creature taking 9 damage makes the most sense.

"Unless the foe succeeds at a Will save, reduce the damage you take from the attack by your mystic level (to a maximum of the attack’s damage), and the foe takes an equal amount of damage."

Since the sentence refers to the damage being done by the attack in the first part, it should still be referring to that amount when it makes another reference to damage later on, less the amount it was reduced by when you used the ability.

I do agree that a somewhat more clear explanation would have been better, but this is the best I can come up with.

[SirShua]

I believe the enemy takes an amount equal to the damage you reduced or ignored. In this case 1. The ability describes how much damage is reduced, and immediately says the enemy takes equal damage, so equal to the reduction described.

[ograx]

Conflicting opinions! I’m GMing the game so I just want to make sure I’m getting it right as I table ruled it as 1 damage but felt very conflicted based on the reading. An official ruling would be much appreciated!

[Robert Gooding]

Well let’s compare to the only other lvl 1 connection ability that costs a resolve point, which heals everyone within 30 ft for 2d8 dmg that scales up, as resolve points are typically reserved for powerful abilities I have to conclude that rai is equal to the damage taken not damage reduced

I am however faqing this

[baronvoncheese]

I originally thought it was the damaged reduced but now I'm beginning to change my mind. The fact that it costs a resolve to deal 1 damage just seems a little silly to me. The being said if it is the damage that was not reduced this has the potential to be a very very strong ability.

[Cozzymandias]

As much as I agree with the fact that this reading would make it kinda underpowered, I think it definitely does the damage removed (i.e. 1 at level 1), first because that's the way the rules text reads to me and second because that seems to fit the ability's fluff better; you're sharing the pain with the enemy, so you're removing damage from yourself and putting the same damage on them.

[Robert Gooding]

I disagree, the fluff of share pain having them feel exactly the same pain you do fits much better

[Vexies]

Personally I feel its damage taken and how ill play it at my table. The text seems to indicate that and honestly that is how I always believed it to read until this thread came up. One resolve for such a pitiful return is hardly worth it so I can't believe that is the intent. I am giving it my FAQ as well though in the hopes we get a official clarification.

[SirShua]

However, it doesn't make sense for an ability to become weaker as you level. Say you have an attack hit you for 25 damage at level 5. You'd ignore 5 damage, and either deal 20 if you return damage taken, or deal 5 if you deal damage ignored.

Then at level 15 you take 25 damage. You ignore 15 damage, and deal either 10 if you return damage taken, or deal 15 if it's damage ignored.

[Vexies]

SirShua wrote:

However, it doesn't make sense for an ability to become weaker as you level. Say you have an attack hit you for 25 damage at level 5. You'd ignore 5 damage, and either deal 20 if you return damage taken, or deal 5 if you deal damage ignored.

Then at level 15 you take 25 damage. You ignore 15 damage, and deal either 10 if you return damage taken, or deal 15 if it's damage ignored.

Hmm.. now you had to go and put it that way lol. I do see your point and its making me rethink my position. I would assume the primary benefit is the ignoring damage part with the damage being bonus.

[Ravingdork]

I read it as follows:

If a 16th-level mystic with share pain takes 20 damage, he can negate 16 of it (taking only 4), and damage his attacker for 16 damage.

In the OP's example, the 1st-level mystic would take 9 damage, and the attacker would take 1.

I didn't realize people were interpreting it in other ways. It seemed pretty plain to me upon initial reading.

[Robert Gooding]

SirShua wrote:

However, it doesn't make sense for an ability to become weaker as you level. Say you have an attack hit you for 25 damage at level 5. You'd ignore 5 damage, and either deal 20 if you return damage taken, or deal 5 if you deal damage ignored.

Then at level 15 you take 25 damage. You ignore 15 damage, and deal either 10 if you return damage taken, or deal 15 if it's damage ignored.

I’d doesn’t get weaker as you level because the damage you will be taking will scale as you level, and you wouldn’t choose to use it on a weaker hit

[ograx]

Wow I never realized there were so many different interpretations of this ability! I’m running the next SFS society session on Sunday so hopefully can get some official ruling by then.