|
Don't have the book close. Wasn't sure how it was worded.Because it says "a melee Strike" and a Strike is an action, is why I asked.AoO causes a Strike.
But the reaction says against "the triggering damage", NOT the triggering attack.
Did you ever get an answer to how low it lasts?
I have always assumed it was for the present combat encounter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...The reaction says against "the triggering damage", NOT the triggering attack.
Did you ever get an answer to how long it lasts?
I have always assumed it was for the present combat encounter.
It's instantaneous. There are two things that make this abundantly clear.
1. If no duration is stated on an ability, feat, etc., then it's either permanent (which I think we can all realize would be ridiculous) or it's instantaneous. You say you assumed it lasted for the combat encounter, but is there anything to indicate it ending after the combat is over? How about at the end of your turn? The day? Nope, it just happens.2. You quoted it yourself. You gain resistance all against "the triggering damage" so once the damage has finished being applied the resistance goes away. What else could the triggering damage mean? It can't mean "resistance against the triggering damage types", because it specifically mentions you gain "resistance all." Therefore, the reference to "the triggering damage" can't be about what kind of resistance you get. It has to be about what you gain the resistance for.
It's not ambiguous.
|
I think it's clear how Retributive Strike work. It triggers against a single attack, and the resistance applies to all damage types separately. For example, let's say the target is hit by an attack dealing 8 points of slashing damage and 6 points of fire damage. The champion is 3rd level, so their ally would be dealt 3 points of slashing damage and 1 point of fire damage.
Probably should have been written as "up to" rather than "equal to".Why would you choose a lower value for the resistance to be?
For example, the champion is level 3. Choose one: resist all 5, or resist all 3.
Because people can be pedantic.
GM: "Alright, the goblin hits the Wizard, dealing 4 damage."
PC: "My 3rd level Champion uses Retributive Strike, so the Wizard takes none."
GM: "Sorry, that ability only protects against damage equal to your level+2, which would be 5."
PC: *flips table*
Since someone else already cast Raise Dead on this thread, I'll go ahead and respond to this too.
That isn't how damage resistance works.
Damage Resistance (all) 5
would easily be able to reduce 4 damage to 0. It could also reduce 2 damage to 0, and could reduce 8 damage to 3.
Wording the ability as 'gain resistance to all damage ... up to 2 + your level' just gives you an option to choose a lower damage resistance value. Which would be a strict downgrade that no one would ever choose to do.
I suppose I am obligated to necro respond?
I know that's not how resistance works, I was complaining about how it could have been annoyingly interpreted.
Ah.
Yeah, there is nothing players can do for a GM that reads the rules wrong.
I suppose I am obligated to necro respond?
I know that's not how resistance works, I was complaining about how it could have been annoyingly interpreted.
It's a good thing the rules already got this explicitly covered:
It’s possible to have resistance to all damage. When an effect deals damage of multiple types and you have resistance to all damage, apply the resistance to each type of damage separately. If an attack would deal 7 slashing damage and 4 fire damage, resistance 5 to all damage would reduce the slashing damage to 2 and negate the fire damage entirely.
|
Yep. Totally. Again. Don't need to convince me. And didn't need to convince me back then, either.
When this thread was created, though, the rules were, what, 7 months old? The second errata wasn't even around, yet.
I was complaining about how the rules "could have been interpreted". If this thread originated today, my original response would have been different.
Btw have I mentioned how much I hate thread necros?